From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>
Cc: gnu@the-meissners.org, wilson@specifixinc.com, aaw@google.com,
tromey@redhat.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: PATCH PING: distcc and ccache speedup: adds directives-only preprocessing
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 07:16:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46A80DEE.9060908@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3myxkfp6x.fsf@localhost.localdomain>
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I would approve the patch if I could, but, unfortunately, since it
> adds a new option and a new way of reading files, it is probably
> non-algorithmic.
Algorithmic, I think you mean?
This patch is OK, with one caveat: I think the documentation could be
better.
> +@item -fdirectives-only
> +@opindex fdirectives-only
> +This option provides a simplified preprocessor to improve the
> +performance of distributed build systems such as distcc. It's
> +behavior depends on a number of other flags.
This paragraph doesn't say much. I think combining it with the next one
would be better:
With @option{-E}, limit preprocessing to the handling of directives
such as @code{#define}, @code{#ifdef}, and @code{#error}. Other
preprocessor operations, such as macro expansion and trigraph
conversion are not performed. In addition, as with @option{-dD},
macro definitions are included in the output.
> +If the @option{-fpreprocessed} option is enabled, it suppresses
> +predefinition of most builtin and command line macros. This
> +prevents duplicate definition of macros output with the @option{-E}
> +option.
I don't entirely understand this paragraph. Does this apply when -E is
in effect? Does it really suppress *most* macros, or *all* of them? If
some are not suppressed, *which* are not suppressed?
When the documentation is revised, I will review it -- or, Ian, you can
just review it and approve it, now that I've signed off on the body of
the patch.
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-26 2:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-25 16:10 Ian Lance Taylor
2007-07-25 16:27 ` Andreas Schwab
2007-07-26 7:16 ` Mark Mitchell [this message]
2007-07-26 10:51 ` Dave Korn
2007-07-26 19:37 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2007-07-26 22:10 ` Ollie Wild
2007-07-29 19:29 ` Mark Mitchell
2007-07-30 18:53 ` Ollie Wild
2007-07-27 23:17 ` Michael Meissner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=46A80DEE.9060908@codesourcery.com \
--to=mark@codesourcery.com \
--cc=aaw@google.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gnu@the-meissners.org \
--cc=iant@google.com \
--cc=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=wilson@specifixinc.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).