From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf1-x12e.google.com (mail-lf1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12e]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90D163858D35 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2023 11:18:19 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 90D163858D35 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-lf1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-50325ce89e9so7229759e87.0 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2023 04:18:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1696936698; x=1697541498; darn=gcc.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=Nuz0imdiKRuW6EaI/dBvx6Z1SPoYNwMH8BrKmRGvWFI=; b=nTaq86bIChF9OE+wlcU+0MTz4czC0/Ywdm0mDptprf9gMjYpRaORdP1zpzcB3a1mLq cCwIpMbcBikQWGjJh3g/dzNKCEPkWejAuZ76xPY8WW5uLlEXv18eETusggnL4qOHyx0/ A2eC11t8pyUJLG9Dv2ydHZS/ZoZam9jE/AbH9oeFcOMGZJMvNUcDRPxqpnuG9wWMGaVr GpECcoXl887iwaAlxnyJySAK5ziT+mvlJADkHYecJ2ZbVd89GqPpF9yKTRoSVzZ3XUSx 3pRSDDz+6vFnVgYfwI825yZppWzOy8gyPUHHyQyjfWUqmcSyAkdLUSUJJXdzPjlV4h+/ GIHA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1696936698; x=1697541498; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Nuz0imdiKRuW6EaI/dBvx6Z1SPoYNwMH8BrKmRGvWFI=; b=CW++041Vjij2uLij+F+nF7warxOvOtOzy7svdvhxZ7m6NOuwya4TUKrJF2yyiDo6f3 yl6aSutwuuvhwlpGv4Pvph0XxRQ30D6EIyE7q4KAv2HFxn0fAD7NoIUiKhuXQmJ5HxOn lXdr3nivLzFXGqKkvqY9EVmnMJ9Tsm9fulMi6fKg6GhbF3yZN3geThqdiHUPCisyR1So Y0QDH5m2eVDs/bGB8SFdBXDrW9LhRYq05RC2LA3DhjmR0xu29tMu3pBsfjdx21Lru4Jl 9+9SPiZ5xSJPvZad87qXq0lk2yjOdVBtd+fd2qbHYm77H+vRLC6xgemOmgSpU3ecXO+J MgIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YykfsSc/wLvnPj4o87Jg/y13fZyxiCKHeRr5YxEndmMNUEsSWZJ /LFsRsPR7xH/HiZAaC6OyDDDRPtuirdYvdpSWos= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH64F4vQ7zEAP6Jrq+BUh4n+6pOIM0ccA6+hgSQMajjOY3Mnn5k0leq9gY61lefJZK1AbVfi4PzPsps0IICVuo= X-Received: by 2002:a19:ee17:0:b0:503:2891:444d with SMTP id g23-20020a19ee17000000b005032891444dmr13284118lfb.64.1696936697538; Tue, 10 Oct 2023 04:18:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <877cnubygs.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <085179e2-3ed7-7bf3-b682-326656db378c@arm.com> <87pm1mag09.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87pm1mag09.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> From: Richard Biener Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2023 13:15:27 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Documenting common C/C++ options To: Florian Weimer Cc: "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP 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 Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 1:13=E2=80=AFPM Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: > > * Richard Earnshaw: > > > On 10/10/2023 11:46, Richard Earnshaw (lists) via Gcc wrote: > >> On 10/10/2023 10:47, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: > >>> Currently, -fsigned-char and -funsigned-char are only documented as C > >>> language options, although they work for C++ as well (and Objective-C > >>> and Objective-C++, I assume, but I have not tested this). There does > >>> not seem to be a place for this kind of options in the manual. > >>> > >>> The options -fshort-enums and -fshort-wchar are documented under > >>> code-generation options, but this seems to be a bit of a stretch beca= use > >>> (at least for -fshort-wchar), these too seem to be more about front-e= nd > >>> behavior. > >>> > >>> What would be a good way to address this? > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Florian > >>> > >> > >> > >> All of these are ABI; so where ever it goes, it should be documented > >> that changing them will potentially cause issues with any > >> pre-compiled object files having different settings. > > > And you can add -f[un]signed-bitfield to that list as well. > > There's already a section for those ABI options that are like > -fshort-enums: > > @node Code Gen Options > @section Options for Code Generation Conventions > > Maybe we should move them over there. > > But that wasn't really the direction of my question. I was wondering > where we should document a future C version of -fpermissive. Options common to the C family are documented in 'C Dialect Options' which says "The following options control the dialect of C (or languages derived from C, such as C++, Objective-C and Objective-C++) that the compiler accepts:" the options usually specify when they do not apply to all of the above sibling languages (where it's not obvious). Richard. > Thanks, > Florian >