This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc for syntax check only (C): need to read source from stdin
- From: Bernardo Innocenti <bernie at develer dot com>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Dave Korn <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 09:05:18 +0200
- Subject: Re: gcc for syntax check only (C): need to read source from stdin
- References: <SERRANOl519GXfWM7NG0000010b@SERRANO.CAM.ARTIMI.COM> <8764yr98ky.fsf@codesourcery.com>
Zack Weinberg wrote:
> "Dave Korn" <dave.korn@artimi.com> writes:
>
>
>> No write perms mate! However I'll check out HEAD and do a
>>before-and-after testsuite run overnight, and get back to you in the morning
>>with the results (UK time). Will "--enable-languages=c,c++" be enough, or
>>do you want me to test against all default languages?
>
>
> For this, c/c++ should be fine.
Are you serious? Such a dangerous patch surely ought
to be fully regtested with all languages enabled and
*at* *least* using:
- a cc0 target
- a big-endian target
- a 64bit target
- the mmix and vax backends
- the new-ra branch
- the POOMA testsuite
:-)
--- gcc.c.orig 2005-04-12 18:05:46.803428200 +0100
+++ gcc.c 2005-04-12 18:06:28.230338800 +0100
@@ -954,7 +954,7 @@ static const struct compiler default_com
cc1 %(cpp_unique_options) %(cc1_options)}}\
%{!fsyntax-only:%(invoke_as)}}}}}}", 0, 1, 1},
{"-",
- "%{!E:%e-E required when input is from standard input}\
+ "%{!E:%e-E or -x required when input is from standard input}\
%(trad_capable_cpp) %(cpp_options) %(cpp_debug_options)", 0, 0, 0},
{".h", "@c-header", 0, 0, 0},
{"@c-header",
--
// Bernardo Innocenti - Develer S.r.l., R&D dept.
\X/ http://www.develer.com/