From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BC923858C5E
	for <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 22:29:28 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 0BC923858C5E
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kernel.crashing.org
Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 29RMSSoF018346;
	Thu, 27 Oct 2022 17:28:28 -0500
Received: (from segher@localhost)
	by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 29RMSSIP018345;
	Thu, 27 Oct 2022 17:28:28 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2022 17:28:28 -0500
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Tom Kacvinsky <tkacvins@gmail.com>
Cc: gcc-help <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Difference in -E output
Message-ID: <20221027222827.GD25951@gate.crashing.org>
References: <CAG_eJLcR7d1WRi9bwngK8njFEf8TwBnKvSTJmEUCN6ntoPNpxg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAG_eJLcR7d1WRi9bwngK8njFEf8TwBnKvSTJmEUCN6ntoPNpxg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc-help.gcc.gnu.org>

On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 04:22:11PM -0400, Tom Kacvinsky via Gcc-help wrote:
> I am working on an issue that involves our tool depending on the
> preprocessed output from gcc -E.

> # 4 "test.c" 3 4
> 
>         0
> 
> # 4 "test.c"
> 
>                     ;
> 
> }
> 
> 
> Notice how when the macro EXIT_SUCCESS is expanded, we get several lines
> around the 0?

I don't get any of the blank lines you have though?

> This is happening for us with GCC 8.3.  But using something as early as
> 4.8.5 (yeah, I know,
> 
> bad idea), we get this:
> 
> 
> int main() {
> 
>   return 0;
> 
> }
> 
> 
> I am pretty sure this is an intentional change.  What I'd like to know is
> if there is a way of
> 
> reverting back to the former behavior?  I looked at

-P will do what you want (as a side effect though).  -traditional also
works (and that one is more intentional).  Neither of those does *only*
this, but either may be usable for your purposes.

Have fun,


Segher