This is the mail archive of the 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]

Re: [RFC] -Wid-clash-LEN broken

Mark Mitchell wrote:-

> In my opinion, we shouldn't be doing this in the hashtable at all.

Yes, I see what you mean.

> *If* we wish to continue to support this warning, the front-end lexer
> (i.e., c_lex when returning CPP_NAME) should set a bit on the
> TREE_IDENTIFIER to indicate "should be checked for clashes" and then
> we should make a final pass over the table to warn about possible
> identifier clashes.  That eliminates the n^2 behavior (should be n log
> n in the number of identifiers -- you sort and then run through the
> sorted table doing strncmp), allows front-ends to use or not use this
> capability, and sepparates it out from the main path of identifier
> table use.  Then we need to document which front-ends actually use the
> warning.

Uh huh.

> On the other hand, I think this warning is pretty much useless at this
> point, and I think we could probably just remove this warning.

I'd be quite happy to remove it altogether, with a warning when it is
passed on the CL to say that it is no longer supported.  I doubt there
are any compilers that people care about still being used that are
broken to this extent.  After all, GCC is not unique in a lot of
things in the teens of length, and no-one has complained.

Let me know what you'd like me to do.


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