This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] SEE optimization removal
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> The patch would be OK, except that we want to continue to accept old
>> optimization options (just ignoring them) to avoid breaking existing
> Although we've done this for some options (in general, it makes sense for
> optimization options as they don't affect the semantics of the compiled
> code), we haven't done it consistently.
> think). So I don't know if we actually have a general policy here.
I think we do, and if we don't, we should.
In particular, we should have the policy that optimization options that
do not affect semantics, once present in a release, are never removed.
Backwards compatibility is an important principle, and this case of
backwards compatibility has almost no cost to us.
I agree that if we remove an option with observable semantics (e.g.,
-fvolatile), we should reject the option, ideally with a helpful
message. There, it's desirable to prevent old Makefiles from working,
so that we're not silently ignoring user intent.
(650) 331-3385 x713