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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] trigraphs

From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
To: Matt Austern <austern at apple dot com>
Cc: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: 21 Jul 2003 21:59:10 +0200
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trigraphs
Organization: Integrable Solutions
References: <D4079AA0-BBA5-11D7-A43D-000393A91CAA@apple.com><wvld6g31z6i.fsf@prospero.boston.redhat.com><157F22CD-BBB4-11D7-9FDB-00039390D9E0@apple.com>

Matt Austern <austern@apple.com> writes:

| I claim that the latter makes more sense.  -Wall is supposed to be a
| collection of warnings that are appropriate for most users: the idea is
| that, in general, "good" code should compile clean under -Wall.  This
| doesn't apply to -Wtrigraphs.  The vast majority of users have no reason
| to care about trigraphs.  They are never going to use the -trigraphs
| flag
| and have no reason to care what would happen in -trigraphs mode.

Except when they do :-)
I recently posted a GotW by Herb and report from real world by a user.

-- Gaby

References:
- [PATCH] trigraphs
  - From: Devang Patel
- Re: [PATCH] trigraphs
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: [PATCH] trigraphs
  - From: Matt Austern

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