[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Proposal: Making Debian compiler agnostic

On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 17:18 +0200, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Hello,
> This summer, during the Google Summer of Code (GSoC), we have been
> working to provide a way to rebuild the archive with a non-gcc compiler
> (in our case: clang).
> Our project's intent is not to change the default compiler, just use a
> secondary compiler to generate more errors or warnings for package
> maintainers to be aware of. In most cases, keeping both compilers happy
> would result in higher quality code, something I think we can all get
> behind.
> We should also make the following assumption -- the CC / CXX compiler
> will accept gcc compatible arguments, with only very minor changes that
> are gcc compatible as well (such as using -O3 rather then the
> meaningless -O6, etc). The clang compiler, for example, considers
> incompatible arguments with gcc a bug.

Are all alternate compilers expected to implement gcc extensions?  Must
the code be changed to use appropriate '#ifdef __GNUC__' guards?  (And
what happens the next time gcc adds a new extension...?)

If a package fails to build with an alternate compiler (that is, it
correctly *uses* the compiler, but the compiler reports a fatal error),
is that considered a bug, and what severity does it have?


Ben Hutchings
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Albert Einstein

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: