From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-343928-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 23254 invoked by alias); 19 Jun 2013 16:25:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 23242 invoked by uid 89); 19 Jun 2013 16:25:51 -0000
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Received: from qmta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (HELO qmta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net) (76.96.59.228)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:25:51 +0000
Received: from omta03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.27])	by qmta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast	id qEW31l0030bG4ec5FGRp54; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:25:49 +0000
Received: from bag6-1-pt.tunnel.tserv3.fmt2.ipv6.he.net ([IPv6:2001:470:1f04:ae1::2])	by omta03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast	id qGRm1l01H0P3DwE3PGRoeg; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:25:49 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH] DATA_ALIGNMENT vs. DATA_ABI_ALIGNMENT (PR target/56564)
From: Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAFiYyc1MVogg8Do0rKRp7Y1zcPa6Vapidu=0QbJY1mcbt3Usbg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:25:00 -0000
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>, Igor Zamyatin <izamyatin@gmail.com>, "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <38A4E93E-465C-493C-9169-ACB031E0057E@comcast.net>
References: <CAKdSQZkifGa2u=54MxTmBPX5xcRK3Xna=61h4RRP_aT3ASrLMw@mail.gmail.com>	<20130619072213.GK2336@tucnak.redhat.com> <CAFiYyc1MVogg8Do0rKRp7Y1zcPa6Vapidu=0QbJY1mcbt3Usbg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg01140.txt.bz2

On Jun 19, 2013, at 1:38 AM, Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wr=
ote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:12:21AM +0400, Igor Zamyatin wrote:
>>> Right, as you did for other cases. It works here as well.
>>=20
>> Patch preapproved.
>=20
> I wonder how much code breaks these days when we enable -fno-common by
> default?

Not much.  gcc as Apple shipped it, has always been no-common, and indeed t=
he shared library scheme doesn't like common.  There are a few test cases t=
hat would need -fcommon, but I don't think that is a big deal.  Most oss I =
think is -fno-common friendly.  I think gcc should default to c99, and I th=
ink c99 mode (and later) could use -fno-common by default.  For pre c99 mod=
es, I'd probably just leave it to the dust bin of history.