From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 73947 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2017 15:44:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 73898 invoked by uid 89); 13 Jun 2017 15:44:44 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=answered, judgment, quality X-HELO: eggs.gnu.org Received: from eggs.gnu.org (HELO eggs.gnu.org) (208.118.235.92) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 15:44:43 +0000 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dKnzp-0000m9-7S for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 11:44:46 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:45544) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dKnzi-0000j9-MN; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 11:44:38 -0400 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4622 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dKnzh-0001D3-KP; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 11:44:38 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 15:44:00 -0000 Message-Id: <83d1a751us.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Yao Qi CC: simon.marchi@ericsson.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, palves@redhat.com In-reply-to: <86o9trdib1.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Yao Qi on Tue, 13 Jun 2017 16:21:54 +0100) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Remove a few hurdles of compiling with clang Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <1497124689-11842-1-git-send-email-simon.marchi@ericsson.com> <83tw3n5jyk.fsf@gnu.org> <86tw3labb0.fsf@gmail.com> <83a85d5l4n.fsf@gnu.org> <93eb64489ac9d53665a144ddf5a966d5@polymtl.ca> <83wp8h40lo.fsf@gnu.org> <8660g0dzau.fsf@gmail.com> <86o9trdib1.fsf@gmail.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-06/txt/msg00392.txt.bz2 > From: Yao Qi > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Simon Marchi , , palves@redhat.com > Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 16:21:54 +0100 > > Simon Marchi writes: > > > If somebody is willing to do the work and that it doesn't degrade the code quality, > > we should have no problem accepting it. So if it's a "side-step" that allows both > > compilers to be happy, that's ok. As a patch submitter, if you use primarily GCC, > > you are not required to test your patches with Clang, but if you use primarily Clang, > > you must test your patch with GCC (a version that's easily accessible for you). > > > > Does that sound like a good rule? > > Yes, it is equivalent to "it is not acceptable to build GDB with > compiler X but break the build with GCC" in my last email. > > I add some comments from Simon and Pedro. Eli, is it good to you? I believe I answered that some time ago. Specifically, this text sounds too vague to me to be considered "policy". Too much is left to judgment calls. But if everyone else is happy, I won't insist on prolonging this discussion. > I also looked for the place to add this policy. Looks the most relevant > page is https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/Internals%20Compiler-Warnings I would suggest to consider a new page, or maybe make this part of coding standards.