From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E3638560A4 for ; Fri, 12 May 2023 02:57:11 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 00E3638560A4 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gentoo.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gentoo.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> <6a892ea3-6859-955f-f491-d90ccaf562ca@gmail.com> <87ednmb7fj.fsf@yahoo.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.10.3; emacs 29.0.90 From: Sam James To: Po Lu Cc: Eli Schwartz , Eli Zaretskii , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14 Date: Fri, 12 May 2023 03:56:14 +0100 In-reply-to: <87ednmb7fj.fsf@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <87zg6acl4s.fsf@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Po Lu via Gcc writes: > Eli Schwartz writes: > >> 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? > > Because now people will have to go through dozens and dozens of > Makefiles, configure.in, *.m4, just because GCC made a decision that > results in everyone inserting: > > extern int foo (); > > above what used to be implicit function declarations? I've seen 0 instances of this. All of the fixes we've made have been proper and all the fixes I've seen when I report but don't fix an issue have been proper. We wouldn't have proposed this if that was the case. Maybe you should take your case to the C committee that removed the feature in the first place and tell them to reinstate it because of.. ^ --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iOUEARYKAI0WIQQlpruI3Zt2TGtVQcJzhAn1IN+RkAUCZF2rA18UgAAAAAAuAChp c3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVucGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0MjVB NkJCODhERDlCNzY0QzZCNTU0MUMyNzM4NDA5RjUyMERGOTE5MA8cc2FtQGdlbnRv by5vcmcACgkQc4QJ9SDfkZAzWwD/YnQNI5lhkO9VLzIcBB4LcQ4NLlrEiF/Y5bq/ HAmNNdQBANRqJa+MrfR/wjX/qXOav4B5FOBFVSAwMc2OjLCjVywN =uEoJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--