This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs

From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
To: Richard Guenther <rguenther at suse dot de>
Cc: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, dnovillo at google dot com
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:32:05 -0800
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711141714440.4153@zhemvz.fhfr.qr> <84fc9c000711271247h2cfdef1cnbb8711e0433f0ebc@mail.gmail.com> <474C9135.7000100@codesourcery.com> <200711272303.56784.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711272313460.4148@zhemvz.fhfr.qr>

Richard Guenther wrote:

> But I really don't want to "uglify" code just because an assert may
> not exist.

Then, let's just turn off -Werror in that case.  People who don't care
about run-time assertions probably don't want compile-time errors
either.  Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Andrew Pinski

References:
- [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Richard Guenther

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