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] |
Thomas Koenig wrote:
Is my -f(no-)directives patch okay? Or do you envision something else?In principle, it is OK; the only question is what the default should be :-)
I am in favor of "on".
For OpenMP, we require an option to change the semantics of a program based on special comments. Currently, we do not do so for directives which do the same thing.
Well, I see a difference here: (Nearly) all program using OpenMP work also as serial program (-fno-openmp). On the other hand, without "!GCC$ attributes" directives (or the C equivalent: "__attribute__((...))"), the program does not work properly. The attributes are used to be able to express some feature which is not available in the standard but still in some way required: stdcall, fastcall, dllimport, dllexport. "unused" arguments, weak bindings (not yet for Fortran), disabling argument checking (only Fortran), etc.
Tobias
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |