This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: build regression
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- To: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>
- Cc: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, GCC Hackers <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 16 Jun 2003 09:34:01 -0300
- Subject: Re: build regression
- Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat
- References: <87znkkzgqu.fsf@fleche.redhat.com><20030614185607.GD28612@daikokuya.co.uk><20030614203206.GA6054@daikokuya.co.uk>
On Jun 14, 2003, Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk> wrote:
> * lang-specs.h: Rewrite -MD and -MMD to append an underscore.
Am I the only one who finds this... erhm... disgusting? :-) :-(
(no offense intended upon the author of the patch, mind you :-)
I mean... If we (ok, you :-) are revamping the command-line option
handling, wouldn't we be better off with a system that doesn't require
all languages (even those outside our tree) to agree on whether an
option takes arguments or not? I agree this would make the main code
more complex and perhaps harder to maintain, but do we really want to
make it simpler at the (potential and, in this case, actual) expense
of the maintainability of language front ends?
Maybe it's time to step back and re-engineer the command-line handling
code such that it can accommodate diverse needs of front ends like
this, instead of forcing them to eventually start using separate
option name spaces, to avoid stepping onto each other's toes.
Just food for thought.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer