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: Comments with -fpreprocessed


On Fri, 25 May 2001, Fergus Henderson wrote:
> > Maybe we should allow -C to indicate that they are. I.e.
> > 	gcc -E -C foo.c > foo.i			;# generate with comments
> > 	gcc -c -C foo.i 			;# accept with comments
> > should do what you want. Does that make sense?
> That sounds to me like a reasonable solution, so long as `-C'
> is mentioned in the error message that occurs if you do `gcc -c foo.i'
> and forget the `-C'.

This then is an argument for reverting Nathan's patch, as usability-wise
if the compiler is able to say "you need to do this", it can also itself
do "this", especially if "this" is "running gcc again with -C".  It would
make me angry by a large amount if I ever would see this message.  In
Nathans view it was a regression because it was'nt behaving the way it was
before, but I consider the old behaviour broken (I was disturbed multiple
times by cc1 not accepting comments), so it's a negative regression, or a
bug fix.  (Well, it all depends on definition of "preprocessed"; does it
include comments or not; if it doesn't we can make "gcc -c a.i" mean:
"accept preprocessed source with optional comments").  So, I vote for


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