Re: [PATCHv2] Rename -Wall to Wsparse-all, so it doesn't get turned on unintentionally

[Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>]

On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:46:25PM -0700, Christopher Li wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:
> > v2: Update cgcc and remove unnecessary (and now ignored) -Wall from a
> > test case.
> 
> Applied. BTW, what do you think about moving the logic from cgcc into
> sparse directly?

Definitely a good idea.

The logic in cgcc seems to fall in two main categories:
architecture-specific code and code to launch the C compiler.  The
former should definitely live in sparse itself, because otherwise sparse
doesn't have all the proper built-in definitions when launched directly;
I'd like to *avoid* the GCC approach of only supporting one architecture
(or architecture family) at a time, though, and instead let the caller
specify any architecture sparse supports.  As for launching the
compiler, it would prove fairly straightforward for sparse to strip any
sparse-specific warning options from its command line and then launch
$CC; in fact, if sparse did so right before exiting, it could just call
exec and avoid the need to fork.

- Josh Triplett