This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC 3.4 Release Status (2003-12-16)
- From: Kelley Cook <kcook34 at ford dot com>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>, GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:25:17 -0500
- Subject: Re: GCC 3.4 Release Status (2003-12-16)
- Hop-count: 1
- References: <200312161732.hBGHWGNG019615@doubledemon.codesourcery.com> <87pteooday.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <1071597967.3563.19.camel@minax.codesourcery.com>
- Reply-to: Kelley Cook <kelleycook at wideopenwest dot com>
>>> Do we still need -fwritable-strings? We have a 3.4 regression with
>>> that option, and I would prefer just to remove the option, since
>>> we're moving away from supporting traditional C anyhow.
>>
>> Conveniently, I already have a patch to remove -fwritable-strings.
>> It's old and will require updating, but here it is anyway, just to
>> demonstrate how many places have gotten infiltrated by this thing.
>
> Yowsa.
>
> I had no idea there were back end implications for this thing; I
> figured the front end would have done the transformation itself.
>
> That's a helluva argument for getting rid of it.
Then how about deprecating -fwritable-strings in 3.3.3 then?
Lightly tested patch attached.
Kelley Cook
2003-12-16 Kelley Cook <kcook@gcc.gnu.org>
* toplev.c (process_options): Deprecate -fwritable-strings.
* doc/invoke.texi (-fwritable-strings): Document it.
--- toplev.c.orig 2003-12-16 13:36:10.018855500 -0500
+++ toplev.c 2003-12-16 14:20:20.626672000 -0500
@@ -5164,6 +5164,9 @@ process_options ()
}
}
+ if (flag_writable_strings)
+ warning ("switch -fwritable-strings is deprecated, please see documentation for details");
+
if (flag_function_sections && profile_flag)
{
warning ("-ffunction-sections disabled; it makes profiling impossible");
--- doc/invoke.texi.orig 2003-12-16 13:50:17.405787500 -0500
+++ doc/invoke.texi 2003-12-16 13:51:37.021062500 -0500
@@ -1216,6 +1216,9 @@ write into string constants.
Writing into string constants is a very bad idea; ``constants'' should
be constant.
+
+This option is deprecated and will be deleted in a future GCC release.
+
@end table
@node C++ Dialect Options