This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org 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: [patches] Re: i386 REG_ALLOC_ORDER tweek

To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
Subject: Re: [patches] Re: i386 REG_ALLOC_ORDER tweek
From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 14:50:34 -0800
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, patches at x86-64 dot org
References: <20010214231549.G24121@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20010214142135.B17613@redhat.com> <20010214233058.H24121@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20010214143411.A17628@redhat.com> <20010214234642.K24121@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20010214144732.B17640@redhat.com> <20010214234840.L24121@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>

On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 11:48:40PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> BTW speaking about deprecated options - whats about warning about -mpentium
> and friends - these are extremly often used making users to not realize
> that for instance k6 is supported by just trying -mk6 and seeing error
> message.

Can specs do warnings instead of errors?  If so, go for it.


r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patches] Re: i386 REG_ALLOC_ORDER tweek
  - From: Jan Hubicka

References:
- i386 REG_ALLOC_ORDER tweek
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: i386 REG_ALLOC_ORDER tweek
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: i386 REG_ALLOC_ORDER tweek
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: i386 REG_ALLOC_ORDER tweek
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: [patches] Re: i386 REG_ALLOC_ORDER tweek
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: [patches] Re: i386 REG_ALLOC_ORDER tweek
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: [patches] Re: i386 REG_ALLOC_ORDER tweek
  - From: Jan Hubicka

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