https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71851
--- Comment #8 from Daniel Gutson ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> (In reply to Daniel Gutson from comment #5)
> > This macro would change break reproduceability as much as __TIME__ does.
>
> __TIME__ is now being warned on if r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71851
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Daniel Gutson from comment #5)
> This macro would change break reproduceability as much as __TIME__ does.
__TIME__ is now being warned on if requested (-Wdate-time), and can be changed
through e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71851
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Gutson ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> > Any kind of such code goes strongly against build reproduceability,
> > -fcompare-debug etc., so not sure it woul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71851
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Gutson ---
The idea is that the macro expands always to the same value.
The final usage of this facility should not be of any matter to gcc, it will be
just another program.
This macro would change break reproduceabilit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71851
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Then command line macro + __COUNTER__ ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71851
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Any kind of such code goes strongly against build reproduceability,
> -fcompare-debug etc., so not sure it would be really appreciated, it is a
> direction again
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71851
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71851
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
seeding from the current time sounds like a bad idea from a security
perspective.
why not __RANDOM__ or __SECURE_RANDOM__?
