This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C Code mutilation by using gcc-3.3.x
- From: espie at quatramaran dot ens dot fr (Marc Espie)
- To: stock at stokkie dot net
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 00:52:11 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: C Code mutilation by using gcc-3.3.x
- Organization:
- References: <725C097F-574F-11D8-AD61-000393A6D2F2@physics.uc.edu>
In article <Pine.LNX.4.44.0402042222180.23859-100000@hubble.stokkie.net> you write:
>BTW. inside the Linux kernel source the Changes file explicitly states :
>
>"The recommended compiler for the kernel is gcc 2.95.x (x >= 3), and it
>should be used when you need absolute stability. You may use gcc 3.0.x
>instead if you wish, although it may cause problems. Later versions of gcc
>have not received much testing for Linux kernel compilation, and there are
>almost certainly bugs (mainly, but not exclusively, in the kernel) that
>will need to be fixed in order to use these compilers. In any case, using
>pgcc instead of egcs or plain gcc is just asking for trouble."
>Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist
if you are indeed a Linux specialist, you should know better than to
trust what's written in the Linux kernel source. The people writing this
have been known, time and again, to use undocumented features specific to
one set of gcc versions, and then complain fiercely when it broke with
another version.
Hum... come to think of it, sounds like a linux specialist.
Except for the part where you complain that an older compiler does not
compile code that uses a standard that was mostly written *after* the
compiler reached its end of life. That's a new twist. Congratulations.