------- Comment #51 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-08-14 01:26 -------
> There you go, you are now famous.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_Collection#Criticism

Thank you, that's encouraging, I just hope the language of that article won't
be changed too much to also mention everyone else who has a clue.  Because,
you see, I'm of course very excited about me being famous now and about being
the only one who knows the truth, but OTOH I fear there were some other
clever people that happen to agree with me, and I now see a real
danger of those replacing me in that wikipedia article.  Even worse would be
that the list of names would be too large to mention in wikipedia and that
the list would be replaced by some more unspecific phrases like "people who
actually understood the standard" or the like.

> The comunity has been warned about GCC.

Which community?  Rogerio-cdecl church followers?  In that case I'm happy,
because I'll expect less bug-reports from supporters of that specific
religion.  I'll continue to feel sorry for them (especially because I've
learned over the conversation that you might actually influence new
programmers, which is a terrible thing to do for you) but am not particularly
looking forward to seeing misguided and crippled attempts of creating
meagre imitations of stumbling pseudo bug-reports, especially because we
can have the best there is: Rilhas bugs!

If, OTOH, you mean a different community, like for instance that consisting of
people who actually write C source code, I don't see any warning about using
GCC for them.  If anything, it's more like an invitation to use GCC for
developing because it's more standard compliant than other compilers.

> It was a good day's work after all.

You mean writing down incoherent brain-dumps?  Uhm, well, if that's all your
day-work is about... more power to you!


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45265

Reply via email to