This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]

Re: GCC 3.4 Release Status (2003-12-16)

From: Marc Espie <espie at nerim dot net>
To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: Marc Espie <espie at quatramaran dot ens dot fr>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:07:40 +0100
Subject: Re: GCC 3.4 Release Status (2003-12-16)
References: <20031216185823.BE6BF12DC@quatramaran.ens.fr> <87llpcoa46.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com>
Reply-to: espie at nerim dot net

On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 11:06:49AM -0800, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> espie@quatramaran.ens.fr (Marc Espie) writes:
> 
> > In article <200312161732.hBGHWGNG019615@doubledemon.codesourcery.com> you write:
> >>Do we still need -fwritable-strings?  We have a 3.4 regression with
> >>that option, and I would prefer just to remove the option, since we're
> >>moving away from supporting traditional C anyhow.
> >
> > There is still some code out there that requires -fwritable-strings.
> >
> > One specific program is rogue.
> 
> Could you live with Richard Earnshaw's suggestion that it be
> deprecated in 3.4, removed in 3.5, and the bug Mark is talking about
> doesn't get fixed?

Do you have time to fix rogue's code ?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: GCC 3.4 Release Status (2003-12-16)
  - From: Phil Edwards

References:
- Re: GCC 3.4 Release Status (2003-12-16)
  - From: Marc Espie
- Re: GCC 3.4 Release Status (2003-12-16)
  - From: Zack Weinberg

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]