g++ and gcc behave differently

g++ and gcc behave differently

[David S. Miller]

When given just the '-v' option they act not the same:

? ./g++ -B./ -v
Reading specs from ./specs
gcc version egcs-2.92.00 19980815 (gcc2 ss-980609 experimental)
g++: No input files
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

? ./xgcc -B./ -v
Reading specs from ./specs
gcc version egcs-2.92.00 19980815 (gcc2 ss-980609 experimental)

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com

Re: g++ and gcc behave differently

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 199808151450.HAA28720@dm.cobaltmicro.com >you write:
  > 
  > When given just the '-v' option they act not the same:
  > 
  > ? ./g++ -B./ -v
  > Reading specs from ./specs
  > gcc version egcs-2.92.00 19980815 (gcc2 ss-980609 experimental)
  > g++: No input files
  > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  > 
  > ? ./xgcc -B./ -v
  > Reading specs from ./specs
  > gcc version egcs-2.92.00 19980815 (gcc2 ss-980609 experimental)
Yes.  Feel free to fix it.  Though I don't know which one we want
to be the default.  Actually one could argue that the way g77 -v
works ought to be the default

jeff

Re: g++ and gcc behave differently

[Mumit Khan]

Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com> writes:
> 
> Yes.  Feel free to fix it.  Though I don't know which one we want
> to be the default.  Actually one could argue that the way g77 -v
> works ought to be the default

Not as long as it insists on using /dev/null, which is meaningless on 
certain non-Unix platforms.

Mumit

Re: g++ and gcc behave differently

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 199808171403.KAA04041@melange.gnu.org >you write:
  > E.g. now that I've seen `gcc --help' vs. `gcc --verbose --help',
  > I think maybe `gcc --version' should perhaps produce what
  > `gcc -v' now does, and `gcc --verbose --version' what `g77 -v'
  > now does, except perhaps it'd invoke *all* the drivers or only the
  > cc1 instead of the f771.
  > 
  > Seems to me `gcc -v', being shorthand for `gcc --verbose', should
  > just produce a version number and then "No input files" or whatever
  > `gcc' by itself would produce.
I like it!

  > That's just one suggestion, though, and unfortunately it is
  > incompatible with past behavior and expectation, although I think
  > it's more compatible with GNU Coding Standards (which I haven't
  > read for some time).
Bringing gcc closer to the GNU standards is a good thing.  It's the
exception to the GNU standards in far too many areas. 

  > At that point, perhaps some of g77spec.c's internal differences
  > vis-a-vis g++spec.c's can be made use of one way or the other.
  > E.g. some of g77spec.c's abstractions might be worth hoisting into
  > gcc.c itself, making the *spec.c files smaller or, at least,
  > easier to maintain.
I suspect this will be the case, no need to implement the same stuff
over and over in different places.

jeff

Re: g++ and gcc behave differently

[Craig Burley]

>> Yes.  Feel free to fix it.  Though I don't know which one we want
>> to be the default.  Actually one could argue that the way g77 -v
>> works ought to be the default
>
>Ouch, oh man, is that one nice.  :-) It wouldn't be bad if we all did
>it that way.

I think before we try to copy g77's approach around to other
drivers (after 1.1, obviously ;-), we should discuss how we
really *want* these things to work, vis-a-vis their design.

E.g. now that I've seen `gcc --help' vs. `gcc --verbose --help',
I think maybe `gcc --version' should perhaps produce what
`gcc -v' now does, and `gcc --verbose --version' what `g77 -v'
now does, except perhaps it'd invoke *all* the drivers or only the
cc1 instead of the f771.

Seems to me `gcc -v', being shorthand for `gcc --verbose', should
just produce a version number and then "No input files" or whatever
`gcc' by itself would produce.

That's just one suggestion, though, and unfortunately it is
incompatible with past behavior and expectation, although I think
it's more compatible with GNU Coding Standards (which I haven't
read for some time).

Once we agree on a design, we can then worry about how to implement
it portably.

At that point, perhaps some of g77spec.c's internal differences
vis-a-vis g++spec.c's can be made use of one way or the other.
E.g. some of g77spec.c's abstractions might be worth hoisting into
gcc.c itself, making the *spec.c files smaller or, at least,
easier to maintain.

        tq vm, (burley)

Re: g++ and gcc behave differently

[Mike Stump]

> To: "David S. Miller" <davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com>
> cc: egcs-bugs@cygnus.com
> Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 18:42:45 -0600
> From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>

> Yes.  Feel free to fix it.  Though I don't know which one we want
> to be the default.  Actually one could argue that the way g77 -v
> works ought to be the default

Ouch, oh man, is that one nice.  :-) It wouldn't be bad if we all did
it that way.