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.
Geoff Keating wrote:-
> We have a lot of problems in this area; for instance,
> -dynamic can mean 'pass -dynamic to the linker' or 'please switch on
> all these -d options'. I'm not sure what can be done about it other
> than a complete redesign of GCC's options handling.
I intend to unify all switch handling in the front ends. The driver
will remain a mess, but that's SPECS. The technique of c-opts.c can
easily handle the whole compiler proper, in one place too.
It'll be one of the first things I do once I get my employer's
disclaimer.
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.