| To: | austin-group-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: c99 -I option and GCC |
| From: | Vincent Lefevre <vincent-opgr@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 4 Aug 2009 02:38:19 +0200 |
| Mail-followup-to: | austin-group-l@opengroup.org |
| References: | <4a76fb43.lbC4QjMxLz0GOnAz%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de><200908031526.n73FQ0M7002876@aragorn.savarese.org> |
On 2009-08-03 11:26:00 -0400, Daniel F. Savarese wrote:
> Are there any additional compiler options that should be included in
> a defect report?
Here are my comments concerning the other c99 options:
What's the behavior if one gives several -D options with the same name
and different values (and no corresponding -U option)?
-O optlevel
Specify the level of code optimization. If the optlevel
option-argument is the digit '0' , all special code optimizations
shall be disabled. [...]
"all special code optimizations shall be disabled" is quite ambiguous,
in particular because optimizations are not clearly defined. Also,
what's "special"?
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.org> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: c99 -I option and GCC, Vincent Lefevre |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: c99 -I option and GCC, Vincent Lefevre |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: c99 -I option and GCC, Vincent Lefevre |
| Next by Thread: | Re: c99 -I option and GCC, Vincent Lefevre |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [All Lists] |