From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30733 invoked by alias); 8 May 2014 21:01:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30721 invoked by uid 89); 8 May 2014 21:01:21 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 May 2014 21:01:20 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1WiVRM-00034A-As from joseph_myers@mentor.com for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Thu, 08 May 2014 14:01:16 -0700 Received: from SVR-IES-FEM-02.mgc.mentorg.com ([137.202.0.106]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 8 May 2014 14:01:15 -0700 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-02.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.106) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Thu, 8 May 2014 22:01:14 +0100 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WiVRJ-0003dS-BH; Thu, 08 May 2014 21:01:13 +0000 Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 21:01:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: "Herman, Andrei" CC: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: RE: [PATCH GCC]Add 'force-dwarf-lexical-blocks' command line option In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg00533.txt.bz2 On Thu, 8 May 2014, Herman, Andrei wrote: > > > Declarations that would fall into the scope of a newly created label > > > scope are moved into the enclosing "normal" (non label) scope, where > > they actually belong. > > > > Shouldn't you be able to do something like that for the other cases as well, > > to avoid forcing C99 scoping rules? > > I will think about it if you think it's critical. I think it's logically the right design of the option. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com