Re: GCC

[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2004/08/22]

Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhi@xxx.xx> writes:

>> Yes, it's useful. It is NOT, however, C. This kind of thing should
>> require compilation with "--butthead-extensions" and several
>> embarassing "#pragma" lines to make sure that it's NEVER used by
>> anyone who isn't completely aware they're being a wanker.
>
> gcc is full of those.  Some people actually think gcc -Wall will
> protect them from unportabilities.

Neither I nor any of the other GCC people who care about portable code
are likely to fix this, because buttheaded documentation licenses that
discourage people from improving the documentation are worse than
buttheaded documentation.

However, a rewrite of the user manual so that it doesn't describe all
the stupid extensions as the best thing since sliced bread *will* be
accepted.  I guaron-tee it.

zw

• Re: GCC Jarkko Hietaniemi 21:14 on 22 Aug 2004
  • Zack Weinberg 21:32 on 22 Aug 2004
  • Phil Pennock 09:10 on 23 Aug 2004
    • Simon Cozens 13:26 on 23 Aug 2004
      • too deep to show
• Daniel Pittman 04:55 on 24 Aug 2004

Generated at 15:00 on 24 Aug 2004 by mariachi 0.52