This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Trigraph warnings when compiling linux-2.4.0-prerelease1
- To: Joe Buck <jbuck at racerx dot synopsys dot com>
- Subject: Re: Trigraph warnings when compiling linux-2.4.0-prerelease1
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds at transmeta dot com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 10:37:52 -0800 (PST)
- cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Joe Buck wrote:
> > >> line 929: printk("imm: parity error (???)\n");
> > >> line 938: printk("imm: bad interrupt (???)\n");
> > >
> > >This is a kernel bug. That is, a strict ISO C compiler
> > >must print
> > >
> > >imm: bad interrupt (?]
> > This is NOT a kernel bug.
> Well, at least, it's not a serious one. And if you want to claim that
> the kernel is not written in C, but rather in a language dialect called,
> say, gcc258, it's not a bug.
The compiler is called "gcc", and is invoced as such.
And you apparently entirely dismissed the fact that the Linux behaviour is
based on _documented_ behaviour. And you still want to call it a "bug".
> It's more important to alert users that their code may malfunction if
> they compile it with a different compiler than to produce a warning-free
> compile of the Linux kernel. It's a tradeoff. The kernel is only one
The kernel may be one program, but point me to a _single_ program that
uses trigraphs. Show me _one_ serious program that wants to use them.
The fact is, nobody uses trigraphs. NOBODY. They were a bad idea.
But hey, as good as you are at ignoring documentation, I'm sure you'll
have no trouble at all ignoring reality too.