Re: [v3] --enable-pch

["B. Kosnik" <bkoz at nabi dot net>]

>I don't see any support for --disable-pch in any of GCC, before Ben's
>patch.  My point is that --disable-pch might be understood as a
>directive to GCC in general, not just to libstdc++.  My only issue is
>with the spelling of the command line flag.  My intent is only to
>avoid future conflicts.

I'm with Roger on this.

Geoff, do you have any thoughts on this? I don't think it makes sense to
disable PCH support in the compiler, do you? At the same time, I think
--disable-pch is pretty clear, and renaming it to something else when
there's nothing else in the tree using it is pretty silly. Especially
when it's documented:

http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/configopts.html

Maybe this documentation just needs to get added to top-level?

-benjamin

ps. Is it --enable-debugging or --enable-debug? I would very much like
to see the target libraries standardize on something, including --enable
flag name, installed header locations, and installed debug library
locations. The free-for-all with java includes is a bit discouraging.
FYI, I didn't invent this: I used the same procedure as glibc, which
IMHO is quite sound. This is only going to become more important as
debug modes get built into libstdc++ (see ongoing Apple work).