On 25 September 2013 19:07, Nick Lewycky <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 25 September 2013 18:53, Rafael Espíndola > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> Err, we aren't ready for this. If we're going to do this, could you >> stage >> >> it such that the gcc flags are added but ignored, then we error on >> unknown >> >> options? >> > >> > >> > This is already how it works. If our list of ignored gcc -f flags isn't >> > complete enough, that's simple to fix. >> >> I am happy to revert if needed, but as Eli pointed out adding ignored >> options is really easy. Do you have a list? >> > > Using regex syntax: > > -falign-functions.* > -fasynchronous-unwind-tables > -fbuiltin-.* > -fcallgraph-profiles-sections > -ffloat-store > -feliminate-unused-debug-types > -fgcse > -fident > -fivopts > -fnon-call-exceptions > -fpermissive > -fplugin-arg-.* > -fplugin=.* > -fprefetch-loop-arrays > -fprofile-correction > -fprofile-dir.* > -fprofile-use.* > -fprofile-values > -frounding-math > -fripa > -fsee > -ftracer > -ftree-.* > -funroll-all-loops > -fwarn-incomplete-patterns > Uhhh... don't ask me how a Haskell flag got in there. and the -fno- versions of each of these. I may also be missing more, but > this is a start. > > Nick > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
