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: assertify mn10300


On May  7, 2005, Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com> wrote:

> It was discussed to death when Nathan originally proposed them,

Sorry, I missed that.

> and a
> compromise was reached (--enable-checking=release doesn't disable
> gcc_assert, you have to build specifically with --disable-checking).

I see.  I was misled by a recent patch I posted, in which Roger Sayle
recommended me not to use gcc_assert in a certain case because it
would remove the desired side effects should checking be disabled.  I
didn't realize releases no longer had all forms of checking disabled.

> I'm getting tired of people trying to dig up the dead horse and beat
> on it some more.

That was not my intention.  Sorry if it sounded like that.

But hey, beating dead horses must be fun, if so many people seem to
like to do it.  I should try it some time :-) :-)

-- 
Alexandre Oliva             http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}


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