------- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-15 20:00 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> Subject: Re: New: Unexpected error message for bad command
> line argument
>
> My multilib selection proposal
> <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-01/msg00063.html> envisages the driver
> having a better structured notion of what options exist (shared with cc1),
Do you have preliminary patches? I am trying to implement handling group
options (-Wimplicit) in a more consistent way but that would require to break
up the global options.c in per-FE files to avoid problems with undefined
functions. Is this part of your plan / conflicting with it / indifferent ?
--- gcc/doc/options.texi (revision 158350)
+++ gcc/doc/options.texi (working copy)
@@ -141,10 +141,16 @@ will check and convert the argument befo
option handler. @code{UInteger} should also be used on options like
@code{-falign-loops} where both @code{-falign-loops} and
@code{-falign-loop...@var{n} are supported to make sure the saved
options are given a full integer.
+...@item Group
+This option controls other options. There must be a corresponding
+function @code{set_OPTION} defined somewhere that specifies which
+further actions are taken when this option is enabled/disabled.
+
+
@item Var(@var{var})
The state of this option should be stored in variable @var{var}.
The way that the state is stored depends on the type of option:
@itemize @bullet
> in which context the -- to -f mapping might be implemented through a more
> general system of option aliases rather than the present textual
> translation. So those changes should make it easier to give better
> diagnostics here (and more generally to improve how GCC handles --
> options).
>
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43687
