From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31977 invoked by alias); 4 Aug 2009 13:44:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 31967 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Aug 2009 13:44:14 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from vinc17.pck.nerim.net (HELO prunille.vinc17.org) (213.41.242.187) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Aug 2009 13:44:06 +0000 Received: by prunille.vinc17.org (Postfix, from userid 501) id CB0603CB9176; Tue, 4 Aug 2009 15:44:02 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 13:51:00 -0000 From: Vincent Lefevre To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: order of -D and -U is significant Message-ID: <20090804134402.GA29364@prunille.vinc17.org> Mail-Followup-To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Mailer-Info: http://www.vinc17.org/mutt/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20-6003-vl-r30587 (2009-07-30) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-08/txt/msg00061.txt.bz2 On 2009-08-03 15:52:37 +0200, Unruh, Erwin wrote: > In current gcc the order of options -D and -U is significant. The > Single Unix(r) Specification explicitly specifies that the order > should not matter for the c89 command. It reads (cited from > version 2, which is ten years old): [...] FYI, I reported a bug there: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40960 (but I mentioned c99 instead of c89, as this is what's in the current discussion in the austin-group list). -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)