PATCH: invoke.texi (was: Patch for bug with new-initializers)

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Tue, 10 Mar 1998, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> BTW, I am very dubious of GNU extensions (such as implicit typename,
> these extended new-initializers, labeled initializers) and so forth,
> because they seem to cause quite a few bugs, are not tested often
> enough, and add complexity when trying to work on the C++ front-end.
> They also create noise on the list; when deciding whether to fix a
> problem or not, I have to figure out whether it's one I care about,
> and I generally don't care about these extensions. [...]

How about the following patch? (From other messages I've read on the egcs
lists it seems that the number GNU extension proponents is actually not
really that high...) 

Gerald


Mon May 11 18:06:32 1998  Gerald Pfeifer  <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at>

	* invoke.texi: Remove recommendation for using GNU C extensions.

Index: invoke.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /egcs/carton/cvsfiles/egcs/gcc/invoke.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.41
diff -r1.41 invoke.texi
1240,1244c1240
< be quite different from @samp{-pedantic}.  We recommend, rather, that
< users take advantage of the extensions of GNU C and disregard the
< limitations of other compilers.  Aside from certain supercomputers and
< obsolete small machines, there is less and less reason ever to use any
< other C compiler other than for bootstrapping GNU CC.
---
> be quite different from @samp{-pedantic}.