From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24761 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2004 03:38:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 24746 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2004 03:38:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO yosemite.airs.com) (209.128.65.135) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 4 Apr 2004 03:38:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 21273 invoked by uid 10); 4 Apr 2004 03:38:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 6793 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2004 03:38:46 -0000 From: Ian Lance Taylor To: Geoffrey Keating Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [Bug pch/14400] Cannot compile qt-x11-free-3.3.0 References: <20040303083528.14400.schmid@snake.iap.physik.tu-darmstadt.de> <20040401011718.8875.qmail@sources.redhat.com> <3E8711F6-84DA-11D8-98AA-000A95B1F520@apple.com> Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2004 03:38:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <3E8711F6-84DA-11D8-98AA-000A95B1F520@apple.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00182.txt.bz2 Geoffrey Keating writes: > I think that PCH that fails on one case out of a thousand is better > than PCH that fails in one thousand cases out of one thousand. Any thoughts on how difficult it would be to, when a PCH can not be loaded at the correct address, skip the PCH and try for the original header files? We'd want to issue a warning, but the result will still be better then a compiler crash, particularly since the crash will be awkward to work around without manually removing the PCH. Of course, the result will not necessarily be equivalent--the original headers might not be present, or might have been modified since the PCH was created. Ian