Re: Proposal to move Valgrind annotations from "valgrind" to "misc" --enable-checking option

[Laurynas Biveinis <laurynas dot biveinis at gmail dot com>]

2011/2/8 Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com>:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2011, Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
>> Thus I propose to separate the two. To avoid introducing another
>> --enable-checking option, let's move the annotations to the "misc"
>> checking and also enable "misc" too if "valgrind" is requested. Both
>> these options are disabled for releases, so no performance loss there.
>>
>> There are two drawbacks I can think of. First, if one wants Valgrind
>> annotations but does not have the required headers, then the compiler
>> will be built without them - silently (currently
>> --enable-checking=valgrind fails if headers are not found). Second,
>> the compiler binary will be built slightly different if "misc" is
>> enabled depending on the presence or absence of those headers. I
>> believe these are minor enough.

[...]

> If people want your "misc" changes but failing without headers,
> add "--enable-valgrind-annotations".

I think this is a good idea. At gc-improv I will go with my original
plan of moving annotations to misc and will add
--enable-valgrind-annotations for hard error if headers not available.

Thanks,
-- 
Laurynas