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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Problem with PFE approach [Was: Faster compilation speed]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 wrote:

> > On Sun, 18 Aug 2002, Timothy J. Wood wrote:
> > >    I can accept an argument of "this is too hard to do correctly right
> > > now", but not "the user screwed up".  The user didn't screw up -- the
> > > compiler just isn't smart enough to do it correctly yet.
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 11:21:28AM +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
> > If the source doesn't compile without the prefix header the user did
> > something wrong, IOW he's screwed if he doesn't want to fix it.  Period.
> PFE makes it too easy for the programmer to accidentally give his program
> different meaning with or without the prefix header.  I can do without one
> more way to screw up my program.
> The following set of files will compile a program with or without PFE, but
> using a PFE that contains both a.h and b.h, the behavior will change. 

This is an implementation problem, and one that should be fixed.
As is making symbols visible without the explicit includes (Though this is 
slightly harder to solve, but still possible through various means).

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