This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] cosmetics for configure* in gcc
- From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
- To: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
- Cc: Andreas Tobler <andreast-list at fgznet dot ch>, Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:55:16 +0200
- Subject: Re: [patch] cosmetics for configure* in gcc
- References: <488B87FC.40306@fgznet.ch> <488C49A6.9020105@gnu.org> <20080727172458.GA7445@ins.uni-bonn.de> <488CC684.9000000@fgznet.ch> <jetzcyzo2x.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
>> +ACX_PROG_CC_WARNING_OPTS(
>> + [m4_do([-W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes ],
>> + [-Wmissing-prototypes -Wcast-qual])], [loose_warn])
>> +ACX_PROG_CC_WARNING_OPTS(
>> + [m4_do([-Wold-style-definition -Wc++-compat ],
>> + [-Wmissing-format-attribute])], [strict_warn])
>> +ACX_PROG_CC_WARNING_ALMOST_PEDANTIC(
>> + [m4_do([-Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros ],
>> + [-Wno-overlength-strings])], [strict_warn])
>
> I don't think the m4_do call should be quoted. In the last case this
> results in a weird cache variable
> (acx_cv_prog_cc_pedantic_m4_do__Wno_long_long__Wno_variadic_macros_____________Wno_overlength_strings_)
> because ACX_PROG_CC_WARNING_ALMOST_PEDANTIC does not expand the first
> argument when constructing it (which I think is correct).
I think the safest option would be m4_quote(m4_do(...)). Otherwise, the
day someone adds -Wno-dnl you might be screwed. :-)
Paolo