Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?
On Fri, 11 Nov 2022, Zack Weinberg via Gcc wrote: > These are also a trip hazard for novices, and the only way to turn them > off is with -std=cXX, which also turns another trip hazard (trigraphs) > *on*… so yeah, anything you can do to help speed up their removal, I > think it’d be worthwhile. As of GCC 13, -std=c2x will disable trigraphs, since they've been removed from C2x. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: Linux-abi group
On Mon, 8 Feb 2016, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> I was referring to program properties: > >> > >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/generic-abi/fyIXttIsYc8 > > > > This looks more like an ELF topic to me, not really ABI. > > > > Please discuss this on a GNU project list because it affects the > > entire GNU project. > > > > gABI is ELF and affects all users, including GNU project, of gABI. > Linux-abi discusses Linux-specific extensions to gABI. It is for tools > like compilers, assembler, linker and run-time. It isn't appropriate > for any GNU project list. I find it extremely unlikely that many well-thought-out extensions would be appropriate for GNU systems using the Linux kernel but not for GNU systems using Hurd or other kernels - the only such cases would be for things very closely related to kernel functionality. There is a strong presumption that toolchain configuration should apply to all GNU systems rather than being specific to GNU/Linux without good reason. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: Linux-abi group
On Thu, 11 Feb 2016, Suprateeka R Hegde wrote: > H.J, > > I think we are fragmenting with too many standards and mailing lists. This new > discussion group and eventually the resulting standards, all might be put > under LSB http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/lsb.shtml > > The Intro on LSB says: > http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/elfintro.html > > And thats what this proposal is intended for. > > And we can use the LSB mailing list > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-discuss for all > discussions. > > What do you think? I think that none of the ABI extensions in question are anything to do with Linux, the kernel. Rather, they are ABI extensions for userspace in the GNU system, which apply the same under multiple kernels (but some of them may well not apply to Android systems using the Linux kernel, for example, if the Bionic C library and dynamic linker lack the relevant features). Thus it would be more appropriate for a mailing list to be hosted on sourceware or Savannah, and for any resulting documents to refer to GNU, not to Linux. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
