On Mon, 10 Oct 2011, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > I realized this one hasn't made it in, but is really nice. I made a > number of minor edits (typos, markup, simplifying headings,... among > others). What do you think -- should we include this?
Checking mailing list archives I realized that Jakub had provided feedback ( http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00987.html ) that the strict overflow warnings had been fixed. Hence I went ahead and committed the removal below. Gerald Index: porting_to.html =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.6/porting_to.html,v retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.3 porting_to.html --- porting_to.html 12 Oct 2011 16:16:54 -0000 1.3 +++ porting_to.html 24 Oct 2011 00:52:53 -0000 @@ -65,24 +65,6 @@ <code>-Wno-unused-but-set-variable</code> or <code>-Wno-unused-but-set-parameter</code>.</p> -<h3>Strict overflow warnings</h3> - -<p>Using the <code>-Wstrict-overflow</code> flag with -<code>-Werror</code> and optmization flags above <code>-O2</code> -may result in compile errors when using glibc optimizations -for <code>strcmp</code>.</p> - -<p>For example,</p> -<pre> -#include <string.h> -void do_rm_rf (const char *p) { if (strcmp (p, "/") == 0) return; } -</pre> -<p>Results in the following diagnostic:</p> -<pre> -error: assuming signed overflow does not occur when changing X +- C1 cmp C2 to X cmp C1 +- C2 [-Werror=strict-overflow] -</pre> - -<p>To work around this, use <code>-D__NO_STRING_INLINES</code>.</p> <h2>C++ language issues</h2> @@ -139,11 +121,6 @@ to fix build failures with new GCC versions</a> </p> -<p> -Jim Meyering, - <a href="http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-March/149355.html";>gcc-4.6.0-0.12.fc15.x86_64 breaks strcmp?</a> -</p> - </body> </html>
