From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-il1-x132.google.com (mail-il1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::132]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4219D3857357 for ; Thu, 11 May 2023 22:43:35 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 4219D3857357 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-il1-x132.google.com with SMTP id e9e14a558f8ab-33494fe24b5so53552905ab.0 for ; Thu, 11 May 2023 15:43:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1683845014; x=1686437014; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=hhIbcCRArmkRazLb32WUT+09o+Da+SOAa45kGxVDZJA=; b=A1+rvOhhU2Fg0jE0mpz/24yZDYjkrBFoNhzljYwDYLChITYn20QvSk0EBd2TlikjKI 656UZrHs6G3MGb5n4FIGR7g1yfyqgIpwhBlh9Phn0hGxiWtvonhQyaPIzbMH7oAhFs63 DttRwnSK8ARu9jxXW+cAXgQ1NqLTbaPV2DIcTqbdTwg6bOTsGKdg9Q8AqGjob5Mg9SCE WWTMUqczU+0LDqILak93SVkdazXiTp1oS/fMTigueZtIci4zLcJAXYAcx/liCRYIfLn0 MdoyJY0gSWp3Eb8XZhDETXrqvNWg1ebJJ5HLMqN6TOVmcnFrllwB7BxdPoWUDqoYF/8s Yesw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1683845014; x=1686437014; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=hhIbcCRArmkRazLb32WUT+09o+Da+SOAa45kGxVDZJA=; b=ToEoEdUEiqOaS0S3UofYnLSKzd9yVA42k5B20a9/kN9s6nUaZKt7Qmjak6tIj0rgNp usVfZZK94viAkzrETMtTVTsnxZvZGwVxkIe5aVZ9+BCYt1d6U7MiMbWV8Z6JXdRUmpeJ HX3Fe7CBuc+ezY1tZ23U9yVhlCHg2+YOeOdJXqWnq7F5ONVBwhYl8zPFBlL8dPfypfxJ 0d1yZA6S93kf2O5YzhJc370jfDqmKEzrNi5+ru7Py/QhnnM5oTC4CVSWs05ZshVB+Apa XBuQK4kzRrecj79w89PIbKp0poYkCCAjF+8FeQNRZ2VthzD0MClP0P4xYqP7xYoq4EST U2dQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDwZCk/8UUCswulb6Dg8UIWTIjhgz8aQ9vChrt+7VaBAKy5CFWLx U7dPyR5n4SVTp4P0jpKfHSq0ryXSEyOhuw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ7QsGlt4zWE0QjNow8sil1fyp4fUfbC3HEO0aCknw+rPWqGm6dd2/XtdfhY9Z1//Jx2+ZyQ9w== X-Received: by 2002:a92:2908:0:b0:32a:d851:37e6 with SMTP id l8-20020a922908000000b0032ad85137e6mr14624908ilg.32.1683845014529; Thu, 11 May 2023 15:43:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2600:1700:57f0:ca20:763a:c795:fcf6:91ea? ([2600:1700:57f0:ca20:763a:c795:fcf6:91ea]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l15-20020a92290f000000b00325e56c1cdcsm3533061ilg.49.2023.05.11.15.43.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 11 May 2023 15:43:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6a892ea3-6859-955f-f491-d90ccaf562ca@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 18:43:32 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.1 Subject: Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14 Content-Language: en-US-large To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <87mt2behdl.fsf@yahoo.com> <57238276-5966-98d6-d5f0-f5451013ed17@gmail.com> <871qjned25.fsf@yahoo.com> <67e65b41-5400-d1c2-9f43-f94d0ea7da9b@gmail.com> <83zg6b5qsv.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Schwartz X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett In-Reply-To: <83zg6b5qsv.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,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 List-Id: On 5/11/23 2:24 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Please be serious, and please don't mock your opponents. This is a > serious discussion of a serious subject, not a Twitter post. I responded with precisely the degree of seriousness as the statement I responded to. For the record, I believe both statements to have been serious. Not necessarily correct, but serious. > Back to the subject: the guarantees I would personally like to have is > that the current GCC development team sees backward compatibility as > an important goal, and will try not to break old programs without very > good technical reasons. At least in Emacs development, that is the > consideration that is very high on our priority list when making > development decisions. It would be nice if GCC (and any other GNU > project, for that matter) would do the same, because being able to > upgrade important tools and packages without fear is something users > value very much. Take it from someone who uses GCC on various > platforms since version 1.40. This discussion thread is about having very good technical reasons -- as explained multiple times, including instances where you agreed that the technical reasons were good. Furthermore, even despite those technical reasons, GCC is *still* committed to not breaking those old programs anyway. GCC merely wants to make those old programs have to be compiled in an "old-programs" mode. Can you explain to me how you think this goal conflicts with your goal? -- Eli Schwartz