This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- To: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
- Cc: ebotcazou at adacore dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, jakub at redhat dot com, laurent at guerby dot net
- Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 04:37:55 -0300
- Subject: Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
- References: <or1wku4yo1.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <200702171221.35732.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <orr6sodqhz.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <200702180838.17032.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <orr6snbx8b.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <1171794073.6518.27.camel@pc2> <ormz39gtwt.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <10702201212.AA06303@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
On Feb 20, 2007, kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) wrote:
>> Any objections to my introducing ADAC or GNATC or some such
>> environment variable, to be preferred over CC to detect Ada support
>> and to compile Ada sources in stage 1?
> We did that a long time ago (I think it was ADAC), but it led to of
> problems, such as the C parts of the Ada front end being compiled with
> a different compiler than the Ada parts and running into all sorts of
> inconsistency problems.
Couldn't the Makefiles arrange for the C parts of the Ada front end to
be compiled with ADAC as well?
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}