This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: forcing tail/sibling call optimization
- To: dewar at gnat dot com, fjh at cs dot mu dot oz dot au
- Subject: Re: forcing tail/sibling call optimization
- From: dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)
- Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 18:27:48 -0500 (EST)
- Cc: bernds at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
<<In ANSI/ISO C: no. But the ANSI/ISO C standard is not a good model
for how to write specifications.
I disagree, it is an EXCELLENT model for how to write *specifications*.
<<In GNU C: yes. For example, many parts of the GNU C manual say
that if a certain option is enabled, the compiler will issue
certain warnings. If the GNU C manual is treated as a specification,
these parts of the manual are definitely requirements on the compiler.
The GNU C manual is nowhere near a formal specification, it is fine
for a compiler manual to talk about warnings, but it is not possible
to "treat" the GNU C manual as a specification, it is just not
So if you want to state what you are proposing as a formal specification,
the "requirement" for a warning should be implementation advice. After all
we expect that GNU C will follow implementation advice for features that
we design :-)