From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: "Manuel López-Ibáñez" <lopezibanez@gmail.com>
Cc: "Simon Baldwin" <simonb@google.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] -Wno-... option to suppress builtin macro redefined warnings
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 16:21:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3od43ebfg.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6c33472e0808080900y2b070776w10d4121b07f269ec@mail.gmail.com> ("Manuel =?utf-8?B?TMOzcGV6LUliw6HDsWV6Iidz?= message of "Fri\, 8 Aug 2008 18\:00\:23 +0200")
>>>>> "Manuel" == Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez@gmail.com> writes:
Manuel> 2008/8/8 Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>:
>>>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Baldwin <simonb@google.com> writes:
Simon> This patch adds a warning suppression flag,
Simon> -Wno-builtin-macro-redefined, to silence gcc warnings where
Simon> builtin macros such as __TIME__ are undefined or redefined,
Simon> either on the command line or by directives.
>> This seems like a reasonable thing to want to do.
Manuel> Do we need an option? Why not allow redefinition of (some) builtin
Manuel> macros by default?
For standard predefined macros (at least __DATE__ and __TIME__), the
standard prohibits redefinition. So, I think it makes sense to
require users to ask for this.
We could do something different for GNU C, I guess. By default I'd
prefer not to add a case here, but I don't feel very strongly about
it. I do think it makes sense to let users use this new feature
without committing to GNU C, though. So, at least IMO, the option is
needed regardless.
Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-08 16:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-30 15:12 Simon Baldwin
2008-07-30 15:27 ` Joseph S. Myers
2008-08-08 16:01 ` Tom Tromey
2008-08-08 16:09 ` Manuel López-Ibáñez
2008-08-08 16:21 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2008-08-08 16:23 ` Simon Baldwin
2008-08-15 17:28 ` Simon Baldwin
[not found] ` <48AEE7A7.9000509@google.com>
2008-08-22 17:17 ` Tom Tromey
2008-08-26 18:38 ` Simon Baldwin
2008-09-02 11:29 ` Simon Baldwin
2008-09-13 7:42 ` Tom Tromey
2008-09-16 16:11 ` Simon Baldwin
2008-09-17 14:19 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2008-09-18 16:04 ` Simon Baldwin
2008-09-17 14:24 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2008-08-22 16:53 Simon Baldwin
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=m3od43ebfg.fsf@fleche.redhat.com \
--to=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=lopezibanez@gmail.com \
--cc=simonb@google.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).