This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Question about option -fpermissive
- To: oliva at dcc dot unicamp dot br, pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at
- Subject: Re: Question about option -fpermissive
- From: mrs at wrs dot com (Mike Stump)
- Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 10:05:25 -0700
- Cc: andris at stargate dot astr dot lu dot lv, egcs-patches at egcs dot cygnus dot com, egcs at egcs dot cygnus dot com
> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 12:55:36 +0200 (MET DST)
> From: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
> On 29 Jun 1999, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> #undef CC1PLUS_SPEC
> >> #define CC1PLUS_SPEC "%{!fno-permissive:-fpermissive}"
> > It might be nice to mention this trick somewhere in the FAQ.
> > Ok to install?
Bad. The defauts for stuff are in the int flag_stupid_stuff = 1
lines. This is the right way to do it. Or during initialization, if
they are dependent on flags.
Also, we should not help users change the compiler to differ from how
we ship it.
> From an educational point of view it might be preferrable forcing
> users with broken headers/sources to use -fpermissive each and every
> time instead of painting over the issue.
Yes. Otherwise they will forget about it. Then when they have
someone else compile their software, or get a new compiler, it all
will break again, and they will scream again... and this will repeat.