This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Might a -native-semantics switch, forcing native target optimization semantics, be reasonable?
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: Robert Dewar <dewar at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Paul Schlie <schlie at comcast dot net>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 01 Jan 2006 15:36:42 +0100
- Subject: Re: Might a -native-semantics switch, forcing native target optimization semantics, be reasonable?
- References: <BFDC76E4.C8BE%schlie@comcast.net> <43B7105C.4010806@adacore.com> <m3zmmgdex2.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net> <43B7854C.7090802@adacore.com>
Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com> writes:
| Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
|
| >Maybe that is the case for Ada; for the C or C++ standards, you'll
| > have to define "good reason". -- Gaby
| >
| Again, I suggest that vague high level discussion is a waste of time
| here,
I wholeheartly agree, that is why I find you need to back up your
universal claim.
-- Gaby