More C type errors by default for GCC 14
Thu May 11 03:14:20 GMT 2023
> Unfortunately, we do not have the source code for our compiler. Would
> you care to ask people here to restore `gcc -traditional'?
This would appear to be a self-inflicted wound. If I understand the
chain of events properly...
- gcc drops support for -traditional
- you wish to use code that does the badness
- you purchase a proprietary compiler that permits it anyway
- to avoid making it produce invalid results, you hack your linker
You'd rather hack your compiler, but you cannot do it because you
purchased a proprietary compiler and didn't purchase the rights to its
(BTW, there's a FOSS compiler that you can hack on if you like.)
That's all fine and well, you do you. What I do not understand is, two
First of all, why are you calling this "traditional C"? It is not
"traditional C". It isn't C. It is not-C.
Second of all, why is this GCC's problem? You are not a user of GCC,
Moreover, this discussion is not about -traditional! It's about
implicit-function-declaration. And implicit-function-declaration does
not have the same problem as -traditional, because
implicit-function-declaration ***WILL*** have a flag that permits people
who are users of GCC, and just want implicit-function-declaration back.
So you have exactly what you want out of this conversation. We concede.
C type errors by default will come with a flag to disable them.
More information about the Gcc