From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3911 invoked by alias); 1 Aug 2002 13:25:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3903 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2002 13:25:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Aug 2002 13:25:25 -0000 Received: from dsl254-114-118.nyc1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([216.254.114.118] helo=nevyn.them.org ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17aFxA-0000nM-00; Thu, 01 Aug 2002 08:25:20 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17aFxD-0001nT-00; Thu, 01 Aug 2002 09:25:23 -0400 Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 06:25:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com Cc: Richard Sandiford , John David Anglin , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: RFC: New approach to --with-cpu Message-ID: <20020801132523.GA6794@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com, Richard Sandiford , John David Anglin , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: <20020801125224.GA5374@nevyn.them.org> <200208011303.OAA20776@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200208011303.OAA20776@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 02:03:26PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 11:56:17AM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > > > Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > > > > > +#ifdef TARGET_DEFAULT_OPTION_CPU > > > > > + if (TARGET_DEFAULT_CPU_P ()) > > > > > + add_option (argcp, argvp, "-mcpu=" XSTRING (TARGET_DEFAULT_OPTION_CPU)); > > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > Sorry, didn't notice first time. Is it OK to use string > > > > concatenation in gcc.c? > > > > > > No, I don't think so. It isn't available (that way) in K+R C. > > > > You're right, I should be using concat(). Before I fix that, does > > anyone know whether XSTRING() works in K&R C, or whether I need to do > > this with some extra quoting from configure? > > I would have said that XSTRING was OK. It would be a rather perverse K+R > compiler that didn't support either > > #define STRINGX(s) "s" > or > #define STRINGX(s) #s > > to get stringification. I know that STRINGX works; I'm just not sure how K&R compilers handle the extra level of indirection in XSTRING. Don't have one to test with, and README.Portability is silent. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer