[PATCH] Bulletproofing -fsyntax-only, round 2 (extra armour plate)

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 14731.64187.329437.797918@loki.wkstn.nix >you write:
  > What do we do about the (many) other places in GCC that may exit, and
  > assertions, &c? We have to decorate all of them, too, or use
  > atexit(). So it makes this code simpler by dividing the size of this
  > patch by about ten :)
For stuff like temporary files we manage them entirely in gcc.c instead of
cc1.  If gcc.c aborts, then, well, we lose.  That is arguably bad behavior.

I'm not sure how to best manage the temporary file problem, except maybe
to move its management into gcc.c like we do for other temporary files.

  > > You had other changes mixed into your patch -- specifically you removed
  > > all the MKTEMP_EACH_FILE code.  Was that intentional? 
  > 
  > I removed the code path where that was turned off, yes; it's in the
  > changelog entry :). As near as I can tell the MKTEMP_EACH_FILE-is-off
  > code path is dead, never tested these days, and likely rotted, ever
  > since your change of 1998:
Sorry, I missed it in the ChangeLog.  Yes, we don't care about the case where
MKTEMP_EACH_FILE is not defined.  But my recollection is that your patch
removed some code where MKTEMP_EACH_FILE was defined.  Looking at it more
closely now, I was mistaken (I read a #if[n]def backwards).


  > > I think you need to make those changes and resubmit.
  > 
  > I will strip out the specs changes, too, because Zack has done the same
  > thing already.
OK.

So the pending issues are the documentation and a better way to handle
the temporary file without using atexit if at all possible -- possibly
by managing the temporary file in gcc.c.

jeff