On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Dave Korn wrote: > ----Original Message---- > >From: Gcc K6 testing account > >Sent: 14 September 2005 19:43 > > > Ave gcc people > > ¡Hola! > > > Is "-DENABLE_CHECKING" supposed to happen in a RC/release? > > Or has -DENABLE_CHECKING nothing to do with the configure > > option --enable-checking? > > --enable-checking defaults to on these days, and has done for some time. > It doesn't enable _all_ the checking options by default, just some of the > most useful ones. > > http://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html > ---------------------------------------------------- > -enable-checking > --enable-checking=list > When you specify this option, the compiler is built to perform internal > consistency checks of the requested complexity. This does not change the > generated code, but adds error checking within the compiler. This will slow > down the compiler and may only work properly if you are building the > compiler with GCC. This is `yes' by default when building from CVS or > snapshots, but `release' for releases. The categories of checks available > are `yes' (most common checks `assert,misc,tree,gc,rtlflag,runtime'), `no' > (no checks at all), `all' (all but `valgrind'), `release' (cheapest checks > `assert,runtime') or `none' (same as `no'). Individual checks can be enabled > with these flags `assert', `fold', `gc', `gcac' `misc', `rtl', `rtlflag', > `runtime', `tree', and `valgrind'. > ---------------------------------------------------- > > which matches up nicely with the "-DENABLE_CHECKING > -DENABLE_ASSERT_CHECKING" that you are seeing ('release' category). > > cheers, > DaveK
AHA!!! I always assumed (without reading the docs!) that the default was --disable-checking in a release/RC tarball and --enable-checking in CVS. Sometimes reading the Fine Manual does help indeed :) Thanx Mu
