[Patch] Support DEC-C extensions
Gabriel Dos Reis
Mon Oct 3 15:35:00 GMT 2011
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Tristan Gingold <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Sep 30, 2011, at 5:19 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2011, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>>> If you prefer a target hook, I'm fine with that. I will write such a patch.
>>> I don't think it must be restricted to system headers, as it is possible
>>> that the user 'imports' such a function (and define it in one of VMS
>>> favorite languages such as macro-32 or bliss).
>> If it's not restricted to system headers, then probably the option is
>> better than the target hook.
> Is it ok with this option name (-fdecc-extensions) or do you prefer a more generic option name,
> such as -fallow-unnamed-variadic-functions ?
As observed earlier, there is nothing DEC-C specific about this, so
"unnamed variadic functions" sounds as if the function itself is
unnamed, so not good.
More information about the Gcc-patches