Re: gcc driver language: poll

[craig at jcb-sc dot com]

I don't see any obvious problems with the new proposal, but am not
sufficiently "in touch" with the world of specs to want anyone to
take that as any kind of endorsement.  One question:

>~X*			all switches beginning with -X
>~X(*)			same as ~X*, but delete -X

Would it be reasonable to replace the second form with this?

>~X?*			same as ~X*, excluding -X

Maybe I misunderstand "delete".  Also, I'm thinking in terms of the
syntax looking a bit more like wildcarding than it currently does.
(That might or might not be a good thing in the long run.)

Generally, though, I think `(*)' is syntactically inappropriate to
mean one or more following characters.  Perhaps another character
could be found, etc.

        tq vm, (burley)