On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Tom Tromey <tro...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Prathamesh" == Prathamesh Kulkarni <bilbotheelffri...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> Prathamesh> Use macro CPP_PEDANTIC (PF) instead of directly using
> Prathamesh> it's definition: CPP_OPTION (PF, cpp_pedantic).
>
> I'm curious why you want this.
CPP_PEDANTIC is used everywhere else in libcpp, so I thought it would
be better to use CPP_PEDANTIC
in these cases for consistency.
>
> Prathamesh> [libcpp]
> Prathamesh> * directives.c (_cpp_handle_directive): Use CPP_PEDANTIC macro.
> Prathamesh> * macro.c (parse_params): Likewise.
>
> Prathamesh> Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
> Prathamesh> OK for trunk ?
>
> Regardless of why, it is ok.
>
> If it is just for clarity, though, I suppose I wonder why CPP_PEDANTIC
> and CPP_WTRADITIONAL are given special definitions. Perhaps instead
> they should be removed in favor of just CPP_OPTION everywhere. Though
> this also seems of marginal usefulness.
>
> Tom
