Re: lang.opts help

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

 



Perhaps it should be documented somewhere, but where? To be honest, if
I had to implement a GCC FE, I wouldn't even know where to start
looking.

BTW, don't look to Fortran for a good example of how to handle
options. Fortran duplicates the common machinery, which does a lot
more than the Fortran implementation. The same applies to diagnostics,
don't follow Fortran, use the common machinery. In general, the C++ FE
is probably the most modern and the best example to look at.



On 30 June 2013 22:17, Philip Herron <redbrain@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thanks so much i just never noticed this lang hook just needed to
> return the option_lang_mask and now its all fine.
>
> Thanks
>
> --Phil
>
> On 28 June 2013 19:46, Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> I have been having trouble with my lang.opts i keep getting:
>>>
>>> hilips-MacBook:gccpy-build redbrain$ gccpy -O0 -fdump-tree-gimple t.py
>>> -o t.o -fpy-dump-dot -fpy-gen-main
>>> gpy1: warning: command line option =91-fpy-dump-dot=92 is valid for Python
>>> but not for  [enabled by default]
>>> gpy1: warning: command line option =91-fpy-gen-main=92 is valid for Python
>>> but not for  [enabled by default]
>>> gpy1: warning: command line option
>>> =91-L/usr/local/lib/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin12.3.0/4.8.0=92 is valid for
>>> Go/Python but not for  [enabled by default]
>>> gpy1: warning: command line option
>>> =91-L/usr/local/lib/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin12.3.0/4.8.0/../../..=92 is
>>> valid for Go/Python but not for  [enabled by default]
>>
>> Does your python_handle_option returns true for recognized options?
>>
>> When you build, in the build/gcc/ directory there is an options.c
>> file. Does it mention Python in lang_names? Do the options have the
>> CL_Python flag?
>>
>> Have you defined a hook that returns the lang_mask for Python? See Fortran:
>>
>> fortran/f95-lang.c:#define LANG_HOOKS_OPTION_LANG_MASK  gfc_option_lang_mask
>>
>> BTW, you don't need to re-define Common options unless you want to
>> completely change their meaning, which normally is a bad idea.
>> Normally you can just re-use the results returned by the common
>> options machinery for your own purposes.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Manuel.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux C Programming]     [Linux Kernel]     [eCos]     [Fedora Development]     [Fedora Announce]     [Autoconf]     [The DWARVES Debugging Tools]     [Yosemite Campsites]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux GCC]

  Powered by Linux