[Bug c/67266] New: Use of "cpp -P ..." collapses multiple blank lines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67266 Bug ID: 67266 Summary: Use of "cpp -P ..." collapses multiple blank lines Product: gcc Version: 5.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mike at flyn dot org Target Milestone: --- I am using: cpp -C -P -nostdinc -std=c99 -Werror to process something that is not C. Everything works, except that one side effect of "-P" is that consecutive newlines are compressed into one. For example, $ cpp -P x x outputs x x I have not found documentation of this behavior. My hunch is that -P should not behave this way because the man page states, "this might be useful when running the preprocessor on something that is not C code." I would think that users employing cpp to process non-C would expect newlines to be preserved. I previously brought this up on the GCC mailing list. See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2015-08/msg00069.html.
[Bug preprocessor/67266] Use of "cpp -P ..." collapses multiple blank lines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67266 --- Comment #2 from W. Michael Petullo --- This does not seem to be the behavior of cpp without the -P flag: $ cpp x x outputs # 1 "" # 1 "" # 1 "" # 1 "/usr/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3 4 # 1 "" 2 # 1 "" x x Here cpp does not collapse the newline.
[Bug c/113610] New: Manpage could be more clear about gcc's -e flag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113610 Bug ID: 113610 Summary: Manpage could be more clear about gcc's -e flag Product: gcc Version: 13.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mike at flyn dot org Target Milestone: --- The GCC manpage states this: -e entry --entry=entry Specify that the program entry point is entry. The argument is interpreted by the linker; the GNU linker accepts either a symbol name or an address. It might be worth noting that this refers to _start, and not main. Many references refer to main as the "entry point" for a C program. Of course, thinking this here fails to realize there is significant initialization that will not happen when using -e. Either mentioning _start explicitly or noting that changing the entry point might leave things like the heap uninitialized (I think) might help. The same can be said about the ld manpage.
