This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Committed, MMIX: minor cleanups. Switch to TARGET_CPU_CPP_BUILTINS.

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 18:50:43 -0700
Subject: Re: Committed, MMIX: minor cleanups. Switch to TARGET_CPU_CPP_BUILTINS.
References: <20020610180838.B658@redhat.com> <Pine.BSF.4.30.0206102110420.88013-100000@dair.pair.com>

On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 09:42:39PM -0400, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> Should -mbig-endian override -mlittle-endian ...

I think so.

> I think only -mfoo and -mno-foo should be allowed to silently
> override each other.

What about -fpic vs -fPIC or -O2 vs -O3?  I think it's the
same issue.

I really see -mlittle-endian as -mno-big-endian except with a more
user-friendly name.  They really are opposites (or members of a
mutually exclusive set if one wishes to consider pdp-endian, which
I don't) and no one expects them to both be in effect.

r~

References:
- Re: Committed, MMIX: minor cleanups. Switch to TARGET_CPU_CPP_BUILTINS.
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Committed, MMIX: minor cleanups. Switch to TARGET_CPU_CPP_BUILTINS.
  - From: Hans-Peter Nilsson

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]