From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-320027-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 28726 invoked by alias); 30 May 2010 08:43:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 28694 invoked by uid 48); 30 May 2010 08:43:12 -0000
Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 08:43:00 -0000
Subject: [Bug other/44331]  New: suggest drop fixincludes oneprocess and just maintain twoprocess
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
Message-ID: <bug-44331-16543@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
From: "jay dot krell at cornell dot edu" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-05/txt/msg03259.txt.bz2

Fixincludes has two ways of doing things: "oneprocess" and "twoprocess".
It appears that oneprocess is more often used, presumably slightly faster, but
that twoprocess is more portable and would work everywhere oneprocess is used.


Suggest just keeping one portable form and removing the other.
Less code to maintain and less autoconfing is generally better, unless the
advantages are sufficient to motivate the extra work and reduced portability.


-- 
           Summary: suggest drop fixincludes oneprocess and just maintain
                    twoprocess
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.5.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: other
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: jay dot krell at cornell dot edu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44331