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: Merge cpplib and front end hashtables, part 1

On Sat, 12 May 2001, Neil Booth wrote:

> Hmm.  Are you referring to things like ordering of options on the
> command line and macros based on what comes last, and other fun?  This
> would address some of the issues, but many would still remain.  They
> could all be handled with a different driver model, but I've not spent
> much time on the driver stuff I proposed last year.

Yes.  As long as the macros get defined by different logic from the logic 
that sets variables in cc1, these problems arise.

Allowing macros to be defined in cc1 rather than just the driver would
also e.g. allow <limits.h> to be simplified - without needing multiple
variants for different systems, and without each target where the size of
"long" can vary having to do its own definitions of __LONG_MAX__ and such
like, the compiler could unconditionally define macros such as __INT_MAX__
using its knowledge of the type it has for int, ensuring <limits.h> does
not get out of step with the compiler's types.  I don't know how your
driver rewrite fits it, but allowing macros to be defined by cc1 seems
like something that ought to be a natural useful consequence of integrated

Joseph S. Myers

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