https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #17 from Sam James ---
(In reply to David Brown from comment #15)
> This has been implemented in gcc 10, and -fno-common is now the default.
> This "bug" can presumably now be closed.
>
> Many thanks to the gcc developers here.
Don
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
David Brown changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #13 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #12)
> Giving errors on old-style code by default sounds like a good idea. We could
> add -std=legacy similar to Fortran to support building old K&R code (and
> that would en
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #12 from Wilco ---
(In reply to David Brown from comment #11)
> Changing the default to "-fno-common" (and ideally
> "-Werror=strict-prototypes -Werror=old-style-declaration
> -Werror=missing-parameter-type") would have a lot smaller
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #11 from David Brown ---
Reliance on -fcommon has not been correct or compatible with any C standard (I
don't think it was even right for K&R C). If the code is written correctly
(with at most one definition of all externally linked
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #10 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> C89 6.7p4 looks equivalent to C99 6.9p5, so I don't see why -std=c89 should
> imply -fcommon.
To reduce costs in upgrading to post-revision 278509 compilers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
C89 6.7p4 looks equivalent to C99 6.9p5, so I don't see why -std=c89 should
imply -fcommon. It's just as bad in C89 as in later standards.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #8 from Wilco ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #7)
> (In reply to David Brown from comment #0)
> > Surely it is time to make "-fno-common" the default, at least when a modern
> > C standard is specified indicating that th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Wil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
This keeps getting brought up in bug 91766 (already added as related from the
other end)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-09/msg00088.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
18 matches
Mail list logo
