On 9/20/2014 8:07 AM, André Hentschel wrote: > Am 19.09.2014 um 17:30 schrieb Kai Tietz: >> 2014-09-19 1:34 GMT+02:00 dw <limegreenso...@yahoo.com>: >>> For the parts that are "working around a compiler bug": >>> >>> - Does it make sense to list the bug number in the comment? >> I think it makes sense in general. Only important thing should be to >> mark bug-number, that it belongs to SF bug-tracker. We might want to >> change in future bug-tracker and so we would loose relation. >> >>> - If the bug has been fixed, what about using __GNUC__ and __GNUC_MINOR__ to >>> limit the code? >> Well, depends on the nature of code. If it is a general bug-fix, then >> I don't see the need for __GNUC__/__GNUC_MINOR__ guarding (btw we have >> in _mingw.h some helper-macros for checking easier gcc-version). >> For compiler-specific bugs, it makes sense. Only questional point >> here is how we treat reviews for new-compilers, as the reason for >> compiler-related bug-fixes might be resolved in future version. >> >>> dw >> Kai > I guess the problem might be related to the early state of changes to gcc for > armv7-pe support, so i don't see a point in reporting a bug
I'm just envisioning someone looking at this code many years from now trying to figure out why it is there and whether it is still needed. A bug number is a simple way to convey this information, but there are others. dw ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that Matters. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=160591471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
