This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.
Toon Moene wrote:-
> >Hmm. That's coming from something else; definitely not C switch
> >handling.
>
> Definitely. So the question is: how do we prevent the passing on of
> this switch to the rest of cc1 in case cc1 is called with the -E switch ....
>
> In f771, we just return -1 from ffe_decode_option - does that mean that
> setting `result' to -1 in c_common_decode_option will have the same effect ?
I don't understand the problem. I thought the original problem was that
the C front end doesn't accept the switch. So I tell you how to get it
to accept it. Then you say the problem is that the C front end accepts
the switch?
The correct place to modify C front end options is the big table in
c-opts.c; nowhere else.
Neil.
- References:
- Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.
- Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.
- Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.
- Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.
- Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.
- Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.
- Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.
- Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.
- Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.
- Re: PR fortran/9038, a regression in 3.3/3.4 with respect to 3.2.