From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from rock.gnat.com (rock.gnat.com [205.232.38.15]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 664563830662 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 23:29:17 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 664563830662 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FA7D116190; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 19:29:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id mQY7dc5jt6Qi; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 19:29:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from free.home (tron.gnat.com [IPv6:2620:20:4000:0:46a8:42ff:fe0e:e294]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87F7A116189; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 19:29:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from livre (livre.home [172.31.160.2]) by free.home (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 25MNStgr743068 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 22 Jun 2022 20:29:05 -0300 From: Alexandre Oliva To: Iain Sandoe Cc: Fangrui Song , GCC Patches , Nathan Sidwell , Joseph Myers Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option Organization: Free thinker, does not speak for AdaCore References: Errors-To: aoliva@lxoliva.fsfla.org Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 20:28:55 -0300 In-Reply-To: (Iain Sandoe's message of "Wed, 22 Jun 2022 19:39:17 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 23:29:18 -0000 On Jun 22, 2022, Iain Sandoe wrote: > It makes some sense to have the option named -nostdlib++ if a target > might add multiple libs (and/or make other changes) for linking C++. if it was nostdlibc++, I'd agree. lib++ is not something that brings C++ to (my) mind. > (so, fo example, if libstdc++ were separate from libsupc++ I would > expect your use-case to wish to exclude both, not just libstdc++)? That's what the testcase requires, yes. IIRC there's another that would benefit from the ability to link with libsupc++, but not with libstdc++. > if GCC already has an option spelling, usually clang would follow that > - it does not seem unreasonable to reciprocate. Yeah, I suppose that makes sense, it's beneficial for users to avoid the cognitive overload of dealing with equivalent options with different spellings. I'll swallow my dislike for the spelling and change the patch to use -nostdlib++. -- Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/ Free Software Activist GNU Toolchain Engineer Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice but very few check the facts. Ask me about