* [Bug c++/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
@ 2003-07-18 13:39 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
2003-07-18 13:58 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu @ 2003-07-18 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2003-07-18 13:39 -------
I think the problem is pragma once does not always work and that is why it is "obsolete".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
2003-07-18 13:39 ` [Bug c++/11569] " pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
@ 2003-07-18 13:58 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2003-07-22 6:53 ` from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (9 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: bangerth at dealii dot org @ 2003-07-18 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
bangerth at dealii dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |WONTFIX
------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-07-18 13:58 -------
Pragma once is obsoleted, in other words it will be removed in the next version
anyway. The warning will then become a hard error, so providing a flag now
that suppresses the warning seems pointless.
W.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
2003-07-18 13:39 ` [Bug c++/11569] " pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
2003-07-18 13:58 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
@ 2003-07-22 6:53 ` from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
2003-07-22 11:49 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
` (8 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz @ 2003-07-22 6:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|WONTFIX |
------- Additional Comments From from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz 2003-07-22 06:53 -------
Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>Pragma once is obsoleted, in other words it will be removed in the next
>version anyway.
Why is it being removed?
Andrew Pinski wrote:
>I think the problem is pragma once does not always work and that
>is why it is "obsolete".
Under what situations might it fail to work?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-22 6:53 ` from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
@ 2003-07-22 11:49 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
2003-07-22 13:58 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
` (7 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu @ 2003-07-22 11:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2003-07-22 11:49 -------
The situations are with PCH (which is not in any released version yet).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-22 11:49 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
@ 2003-07-22 13:58 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
2003-07-22 14:00 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu @ 2003-07-22 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2003-07-22 13:58 -------
Actually for 3.4 the switch to turn off the warning is -Wno-deprecated, so this is already
fixed but since #pragma once is going away, I am going to close this as invalid.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-22 13:58 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
@ 2003-07-22 14:00 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2003-07-23 4:37 ` from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (5 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: bangerth at dealii dot org @ 2003-07-22 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-07-22 14:00 -------
Regarding the reasons for removing the features: there have been long
discussions on the gcc mailing lists about this. I'm not familiar with
the details, but a web search on the mailing lists should turn up quite
some information.
W.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-22 14:00 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
@ 2003-07-23 4:37 ` from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
2003-07-23 4:54 ` from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (4 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz @ 2003-07-23 4:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
------- Additional Comments From from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz 2003-07-23 04:37 -------
Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>Under what situations might it fail to work?
>The situations are with PCH (which is not in any released version yet).
I'm not surprised PCH is not in any released version yet. You will never get
it to work reliably, for reasons that have nothing to do with #pragma once.
It's been tried on other platforms for many years, and it invariably ends up
being more trouble than the problem it's trying to solve.
I speak from experience.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-23 4:37 ` from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
@ 2003-07-23 4:54 ` from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
2003-07-23 14:21 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz @ 2003-07-23 4:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
------- Additional Comments From from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz 2003-07-23 04:54 -------
Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>Regarding the reasons for removing the features: there have been long
>discussions on the gcc mailing lists about this.
Yes, I have come across archives of such discussions. Let me
summarize the points:
1) Possible inconsistencies in pragma semantics between different
compilers ("pragmas are a bad idea in general").
2) Not an official standard supported by all compilers.
Well, I've got news for you. In the years since those discussions, #pragma
once has become quite a widely supported feature, available on many
compilers on many platforms. Essentially, it is now a de-facto standard,
like it or not. Sure, there are technical reasons why it's a bad idea, but that
doesn't make any difference to the fact that it is widely used. If you don't
support it, then you put yet another obstacle in the path of those trying to
port code from other platforms.
I can't claim that GCC isn't big enough to be a law unto itself if it wants to,
in true Microsoft style. Do you want to be like that, or do you want to be a
team player, mindful of the needs of those who have to cope with code
running on multiple platforms using multiple compilers?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-23 4:54 ` from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
@ 2003-07-23 14:21 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2003-07-29 22:08 ` neil at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: bangerth at dealii dot org @ 2003-07-23 14:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-07-23 14:21 -------
Your case is not helped if you insult those who have put time and thought
into the problem by accusing them of arrogant behavior. Secondly, gcc is
by and large a volunteer project. If you want to see a feature working
and supported, feel free to offer patches -- these are the rules by
which gcc works.
W.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-23 14:21 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
@ 2003-07-29 22:08 ` neil at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-07-29 22:09 ` [Bug preprocessor/11569] " neil at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-07-29 22:29 ` neil at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: neil at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-07-29 22:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
neil at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID |
------- Additional Comments From neil at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-29 22:08 -------
I'm handling this.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug preprocessor/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-29 22:08 ` neil at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-07-29 22:09 ` neil at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-07-29 22:29 ` neil at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: neil at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-07-29 22:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
neil at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Component|c++ |preprocessor
Ever Confirmed| |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2003-07-29 22:09:12
date| |
------- Additional Comments From neil at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-29 22:09 -------
Mine.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug preprocessor/11569] there's no substitute for #pragma once
2003-07-18 9:33 [Bug c++/11569] New: there's no substitute for #pragma once from-bugzilla at geek-central dot gen dot nz
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-29 22:09 ` [Bug preprocessor/11569] " neil at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-07-29 22:29 ` neil at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: neil at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-07-29 22:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
neil at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
------- Additional Comments From neil at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-29 22:29 -------
#pragma once has been undeprecated in 3.4 because it contains a correct
implementation at last.
The problems with #pragma once have been related to filename semantics and
symlinks / hardlinks etc.
I will soon undeprecate in 3.3, though its implementation will never be fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread