This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: gcc for syntax check only (C): need to read source from stdin
- From: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>
- To: "'Bernardo Innocenti'" <bernie at develer dot com>,"'Zack Weinberg'" <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>,<gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 11:19:53 +0100
- Subject: RE: gcc for syntax check only (C): need to read source from stdin
----Original Message----
>From: Bernardo Innocenti
>Sent: 13 April 2005 08:05
> Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> "Dave Korn" writes:
>>
>>
>>> No write perms mate! However I'll check out HEAD and do a
>>> before-and-after testsuite run overnight, and get back to you in the
>>> morning with the results (UK time). Will "--enable-languages=c,c++" be
>>> enough, or do you want me to test against all default languages?
>>
>>
>> For this, c/c++ should be fine.
>
> Are you serious? Such a dangerous patch surely ought
> to be fully regtested with all languages enabled and
> *at* *least* using:
>
> - a cc0 target
> - a big-endian target
> - a 64bit target
> - the mmix and vax backends
> - the new-ra branch
> - the POOMA testsuite
>
> :-)
Oh yes, indeed! I'm also testing with both Fortrans, Cobol, Java, and
Ada, and liasing with the gcl and LLVM folks, to make sure it doesn't break
their stuff, and I heard about a bloke in Outer Mongolia who has a custom
port of gcc to a gnu-yurt-yak-abacus target, and I'm quite worried about
breaking his backend... (those Yaks can give you one hell of a kick!)
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....