On 7 Dec 2011, at 15:54, David Chisnall wrote: > On 7 Dec 2011, at 15:48, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote: > >> I suggest you re-read the test code and comments because there's nothing >> random about using latin1. > > Okay, I just looked at the test. Apparently the LANG environment variable is > set, so it is not doing something random (is LANG set inside GNUstep Make for > subsequent compiles though?) > >> Of course there may be errors ... but you don't seem to have found any, and >> just calling it random is not helpful. >> If I'm not testing what I describe, please provide a report of why not and a >> fix. > > I still don't understand WHY it is testing it.
To check whether the compiler supports non-ascii string literals. > It seems that you have broken the build for lots of people (or, at least, > made them explicitly add a flag to remove a scary warning) I think 'lots' is a small minority ... but how about suggesting a non-scary warning? > to provide a compiler flag that is never needed in any of our existing code > and should never be provided for sane code. 1. The check is NOT to provide a compiler flag, it's to check compiler behavior. The fact that checking behavior allows us to add some flags for safety/clarity is an incidental benefit. 2. The reason is that we now support non-ascii string literals for compatibility with OSX. Of course we don't use it ... because we didn't support it before. _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
