On Aug 25, 2002, Neil Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Of course, but that doesn't prevent you adding it for the first line > of the original file now, does it? And it would still be backwards > compatible.
I don't see how introducing a change that was not forewarned in older docs be regarded as backward-compatible. Any other program that claimed to support the old GCC preprocessed output could legally throw the towel when seeing that. > This is another case where I don't think we can reasonably expect > to do as well with preprocessed files as with original files. Original > files should be easy to get right. We can only get debug info for > macros for .i files with -dD anyway. Perhaps -ggdb should imply -dD, now that we can emit debugging info about macros? -- Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer _______________________________________________ distcc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/distcc
