| [ << ] | [ >> ] | [Top] | [Contents] | [Index] | [ ? ] |
This section describes known problems that affect users of GCC. Most of these are not GCC bugs per se--if they were, we would fix them. But the result for a user may be like the result of a bug.
Some of these problems are due to bugs in other software, some are missing features that are too much work to add, and some are places where people's opinions differ as to what is best.
10.1 Actual Bugs We Haven't Fixed Yet Bugs we will fix later. 10.2 Cross-Compiler Problems Common problems of cross compiling with GCC. 10.3 Interoperation Problems using GCC with other compilers, and with certain linkers, assemblers and debuggers. 10.4 Problems Compiling Certain Programs Problems compiling certain programs. 10.5 Incompatibilities of GCC GCC is incompatible with traditional C. 10.6 Fixed Header Files GCC uses corrected versions of system header files. This is necessary, but doesn't always work smoothly. 10.7 Standard Libraries GCC uses the system C library, which might not be compliant with the ISO C standard. 10.8 Disappointments and Misunderstandings Regrettable things we can't change, but not quite bugs. 10.9 Common Misunderstandings with GNU C++ Common misunderstandings with GNU C++. 10.10 Caveats of using protoizeThings to watch out for when using protoize.10.11 Certain Changes We Don't Want to Make Things we think are right, but some others disagree. 10.12 Warning Messages and Error Messages Which problems in your code get warnings, and which get errors.
fixincludes script interacts badly with automounters; if the
directory of system header files is automounted, it tends to be
unmounted while fixincludes is running. This would seem to be a
bug in the automounter. We don't know any good way to work around it.
fixproto script will sometimes add prototypes for the
sigsetjmp and siglongjmp functions that reference the
jmp_buf type before that type is defined. To work around this,
edit the offending file and place the typedef in front of the
prototypes.
You may run into problems with cross compilation on certain machines, for several reasons.
The compiler writes these integer constants by examining the floating point value as an integer and printing that integer, because this is simple to write and independent of the details of the floating point representation. But this does not work if the compiler is running on a different machine with an incompatible floating point format, or even a different byte-ordering.
In addition, correct constant folding of floating point values requires representing them in the target machine's format. (The C standard does not quite require this, but in practice it is the only way to win.)
It is now possible to overcome these problems by defining macros such
as REAL_VALUE_TYPE. But doing so is a substantial amount of
work for each target machine.
See section `Cross Compilation and Floating Point' in GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) Internals.
This section lists various difficulties encountered in using GCC together with other compilers or with the assemblers, linkers, libraries and debuggers on certain systems.
An area where the difference is most apparent is name mangling. The use of different name mangling is intentional, to protect you from more subtle problems. Compilers differ as to many internal details of C++ implementation, including: how class instances are laid out, how multiple inheritance is implemented, and how virtual function calls are handled. If the name encoding were made the same, your programs would link against libraries provided from other compilers--but the programs would then crash when run. Incompatible libraries are then detected at link time, rather than at run time.
double on an 8-byte
boundary, and it expects every double to be so aligned. The Sun
compiler usually gives double values 8-byte alignment, with one
exception: function arguments of type double may not be aligned.
As a result, if a function compiled with Sun CC takes the address of an
argument of type double and passes this pointer of type
double * to a function compiled with GCC, dereferencing the
pointer may cause a fatal signal.
One way to solve this problem is to compile your entire program with GCC.
Another solution is to modify the function that is compiled with
Sun CC to copy the argument into a local variable; local variables
are always properly aligned. A third solution is to modify the function
that uses the pointer to dereference it via the following function
access_double instead of directly with `*':
inline double
access_double (double *unaligned_ptr)
{
union d2i { double d; int i[2]; };
union d2i *p = (union d2i *) unaligned_ptr;
union d2i u;
u.i[0] = p->i[0];
u.i[1] = p->i[1];
return u.d;
}
|
Storing into the pointer can be done likewise with the same union.
malloc function in the `libmalloc.a' library
may allocate memory that is only 4 byte aligned. Since GCC on the
SPARC assumes that doubles are 8 byte aligned, this may result in a
fatal signal if doubles are stored in memory allocated by the
`libmalloc.a' library.
The solution is to not use the `libmalloc.a' library. Use instead
malloc and related functions from `libc.a'; they do not have
this problem.
_dlclose, _dlsym or _dlopen
when linking, compile and link against the file
`mit/util/misc/dlsym.c' from the MIT version of X windows.
cc does not
compile GCC correctly. We do not yet know why. However, GCC
compiled on earlier HP-UX versions works properly on HP-UX 9.01 and can
compile itself properly on 9.01.
alloca or variable-size arrays. This is because GCC doesn't
generate HP-UX unwind descriptors for such functions. It may even be
impossible to generate them.
(warning) Use of GR3 when frame >= 8192 may cause conflict. |
These warnings are harmless and can be safely ignored.
extern int foo; ... foo ... static int foo; |
will cause the linker to report an undefined symbol foo.
Although this behavior differs from most other systems, it is not a
bug because redefining an extern variable as static
is undefined in ISO C.
LANG
environment variable to `C' or `En_US'.
GCC uses the same convention as the Ultrix C compiler. You can use these options to produce code compatible with the Fortran compiler:
-fcall-saved-r2 -fcall-saved-r3 -fcall-saved-r4 -fcall-saved-r5 |
ecvt, fcvt and gcvt. Given valid
floating point numbers, they sometimes print `NaN'.
Certain programs have problems compiling.
#ifdef __STDC__ #define NeedFunctionPrototypes 0 #endif |
You can prevent this problem by linking GCC with the GNU malloc (which thus replaces the malloc that comes with the system). GNU malloc is available as a separate package, and also in the file `src/gmalloc.c' in the GNU Emacs 19 distribution.
If you have installed GNU malloc as a separate library package, use this option when you relink GCC:
MALLOC=/usr/local/lib/libgmalloc.a |
Alternatively, if you have compiled `gmalloc.c' from Emacs 19, copy the object file to `gmalloc.o' and use this option when you relink GCC:
MALLOC=gmalloc.o |
There are several noteworthy incompatibilities between GNU C and K&R (non-ISO) versions of C.
One consequence is that you cannot call mktemp with a string
constant argument. The function mktemp always alters the
string its argument points to.
Another consequence is that sscanf does not work on some systems
when passed a string constant as its format control string or input.
This is because sscanf incorrectly tries to write into the string
constant. Likewise fscanf and scanf.
The best solution to these problems is to change the program to use
char-array variables with initialization strings for these
purposes instead of string constants. But if this is not possible,
you can use the `-fwritable-strings' flag, which directs GCC
to handle string constants the same way most C compilers do.
-2147483648 is positive.
This is because 2147483648 cannot fit in the type int, so
(following the ISO C rules) its data type is unsigned long int.
Negating this value yields 2147483648 again.
#define foo(a) "a" |
will produce output "a" regardless of what the argument a is.
setjmp and longjmp, the only automatic
variables guaranteed to remain valid are those declared
volatile. This is a consequence of automatic register
allocation. Consider this function:
jmp_buf j;
foo ()
{
int a, b;
a = fun1 ();
if (setjmp (j))
return a;
a = fun2 ();
/* |
Here a may or may not be restored to its first value when the
longjmp occurs. If a is allocated in a register, then
its first value is restored; otherwise, it keeps the last value stored
in it.
If you use the `-W' option with the `-O' option, you will get a warning when GCC thinks such a problem might be possible.
foobar (
#define luser
hack)
|
ISO C does not permit such a construct.
In some other C compilers, a extern declaration affects all the
rest of the file even if it happens within a block.
long, etc., with a typedef name,
as shown here:
typedef int foo; typedef long foo bar; |
In ISO C, this is not allowed: long and other type modifiers
require an explicit int.
typedef int foo; typedef foo foo; |
#if 0 You can't expect this to work. #endif |
The best solution to such a problem is to put the text into an actual C comment delimited by `/*...*/'.
time, so it did not matter what type your program declared it to
return. But in systems with ISO C headers, time is declared to
return time_t, and if that is not the same as long, then
`long time ();' is erroneous.
The solution is to change your program to use appropriate system headers
(<time.h> on systems with ISO C headers) and not to declare
time if the system header files declare it, or failing that to
use time_t as the return type of time.
float, PCC converts it to
a double. GCC actually returns a float. If you are concerned
with PCC compatibility, you should declare your functions to return
double; you might as well say what you mean.
The method used by GCC is as follows: a structure or union which is
1, 2, 4 or 8 bytes long is returned like a scalar. A structure or union
with any other size is stored into an address supplied by the caller
(usually in a special, fixed register, but on some machines it is passed
on the stack). The machine-description macros STRUCT_VALUE and
STRUCT_INCOMING_VALUE tell GCC where to pass this address.
By contrast, PCC on most target machines returns structures and unions of any size by copying the data into an area of static storage, and then returning the address of that storage as if it were a pointer value. The caller must copy the data from that memory area to the place where the value is wanted. GCC does not use this method because it is slower and nonreentrant.
On some newer machines, PCC uses a reentrant convention for all structure and union returning. GCC on most of these machines uses a compatible convention when returning structures and unions in memory, but still returns small structures and unions in registers.
You can tell GCC to use a compatible convention for all structure and union returning with the option `-fpcc-struct-return'.
A preprocessing token is a preprocessing number if it begins with a digit and is followed by letters, underscores, digits, periods and `e+', `e-', `E+', `E-', `p+', `p-', `P+', or `P-' character sequences. (In strict C89 mode, the sequences `p+', `p-', `P+' and `P-' cannot appear in preprocessing numbers.)
To make the above program fragment valid, place whitespace in front of the minus sign. This whitespace will end the preprocessing number.
GCC needs to install corrected versions of some system header files. This is because most target systems have some header files that won't work with GCC unless they are changed. Some have bugs, some are incompatible with ISO C, and some depend on special features of other compilers.
Installing GCC automatically creates and installs the fixed header
files, by running a program called fixincludes (or for certain
targets an alternative such as fixinc.svr4). Normally, you
don't need to pay attention to this. But there are cases where it
doesn't do the right thing automatically.
The programs that fix the header files do not understand this special way of using symbolic links; therefore, the directory of fixed header files is good only for the machine model used to build it.
In SunOS 4, only programs that look inside the kernel will notice the difference between machine models. Therefore, for most purposes, you need not be concerned about this.
It is possible to make separate sets of fixed header files for the different machine models, and arrange a structure of symbolic links so as to use the proper set, but you'll have to do this by hand.
fixincludes script to fail.
This means you will encounter problems due to bugs in the system header files. It may be no comfort that they aren't GCC's fault, but it does mean that there's nothing for us to do about them.
GCC by itself attempts to be a conforming freestanding implementation. See section Language Standards Supported by GCC, for details of what this means. Beyond the library facilities required of such an implementation, the rest of the C library is supplied by the vendor of the operating system. If that C library doesn't conform to the C standards, then your programs might get warnings (especially when using `-Wall') that you don't expect.
For example, the sprintf function on SunOS 4.1.3 returns
char * while the C standard says that sprintf returns an
int. The fixincludes program could make the prototype for
this function match the Standard, but that would be wrong, since the
function will still return char *.
If you need a Standard compliant library, then you need to find one, as
GCC does not provide one. The GNU C library (called glibc)
provides ISO C, POSIX, BSD, SystemV and X/Open compatibility for
GNU/Linux and HURD-based GNU systems; no recent version of it supports
other systems, though some very old versions did. Version 2.2 of the
GNU C library includes nearly complete C99 support. You could also ask
your operating system vendor if newer libraries are available.
These problems are perhaps regrettable, but we don't know any practical way around them.
This occurs because sometimes GCC optimizes the variable out of existence. There is no way to tell the debugger how to compute the value such a variable "would have had", and it is not clear that would be desirable anyway. So GCC simply does not mention the eliminated variable when it writes debugging information.
You have to expect a certain amount of disagreement between the executable and your source code, when you use optimization.
int foo (struct mumble *);
struct mumble { ... };
int foo (struct mumble *x)
{ ... }
|
This code really is erroneous, because the scope of struct
mumble in the prototype is limited to the argument list containing it.
It does not refer to the struct mumble defined with file scope
immediately below--they are two unrelated types with similar names in
different scopes.
But in the definition of foo, the file-scope type is used
because that is available to be inherited. Thus, the definition and
the prototype do not match, and you get an error.
This behavior may seem silly, but it's what the ISO standard specifies.
It is easy enough for you to make your code work by moving the
definition of struct mumble above the prototype. It's not worth
being incompatible with ISO C just to avoid an error for the example
shown above.
If you care about controlling the amount of memory that is accessed, use volatile but do not use bit-fields.
If new system header files are installed, nothing automatically arranges
to update the corrected header files. You will have to reinstall GCC
to fix the new header files. More specifically, go to the build
directory and delete the files `stmp-fixinc' and
`stmp-headers', and the subdirectory include; then do
`make install' again.
double in memory.
Compiled code moves values between memory and floating point registers
at its convenience, and moving them into memory truncates them.
You can partially avoid this problem by using the `-ffloat-store' option (see section 3.10 Options That Control Optimization).
C++ is a complex language and an evolving one, and its standard definition (the ISO C++ standard) was only recently completed. As a result, your C++ compiler may occasionally surprise you, even when its behavior is correct. This section discusses some areas that frequently give rise to questions of this sort.
10.9.1 Declare and Define Static Members Static member declarations are not definitions 10.9.2 Temporaries May Vanish Before You Expect Temporaries may vanish before you expect 10.9.3 Implicit Copy-Assignment for Virtual Bases Copy Assignment operators copy virtual bases twice
When a class has static data members, it is not enough to declare the static member; you must also define it. For example:
class Foo
{
...
void method();
static int bar;
};
|
This declaration only establishes that the class Foo has an
int named Foo::bar, and a member function named
Foo::method. But you still need to define both
method and bar elsewhere. According to the ISO
standard, you must supply an initializer in one (and only one) source
file, such as:
int Foo::bar = 0; |
Other C++ compilers may not correctly implement the standard behavior.
As a result, when you switch to g++ from one of these compilers,
you may discover that a program that appeared to work correctly in fact
does not conform to the standard: g++ reports as undefined
symbols any static data members that lack definitions.
It is dangerous to use pointers or references to portions of a
temporary object. The compiler may very well delete the object before
you expect it to, leaving a pointer to garbage. The most common place
where this problem crops up is in classes like string classes,
especially ones that define a conversion function to type char *
or const char *---which is one reason why the standard
string class requires you to call the c_str member
function. However, any class that returns a pointer to some internal
structure is potentially subject to this problem.
For example, a program may use a function strfunc that returns
string objects, and another function charfunc that
operates on pointers to char:
string strfunc ();
void charfunc (const char *);
void
f ()
{
const char *p = strfunc().c_str();
...
charfunc (p);
...
charfunc (p);
}
|
In this situation, it may seem reasonable to save a pointer to the C
string returned by the c_str member function and use that rather
than call c_str repeatedly. However, the temporary string
created by the call to strfunc is destroyed after p is
initialized, at which point p is left pointing to freed memory.
Code like this may run successfully under some other compilers, particularly obsolete cfront-based compilers that delete temporaries along with normal local variables. However, the GNU C++ behavior is standard-conforming, so if your program depends on late destruction of temporaries it is not portable.
The safe way to write such code is to give the temporary a name, which forces it to remain until the end of the scope of the name. For example:
const string& tmp = strfunc (); charfunc (tmp.c_str ()); |
When a base class is virtual, only one subobject of the base class belongs to each full object. Also, the constructors and destructors are invoked only once, and called from the most-derived class. However, such objects behave unspecified when being assigned. For example:
struct Base{
char *name;
Base(char *n) : name(strdup(n)){}
Base& operator= (const Base& other){
free (name);
name = strdup (other.name);
}
};
struct A:virtual Base{
int val;
A():Base("A"){}
};
struct B:virtual Base{
int bval;
B():Base("B"){}
};
struct Derived:public A, public B{
Derived():Base("Derived"){}
};
void func(Derived &d1, Derived &d2)
{
d1 = d2;
}
|
The C++ standard specifies that `Base::Base' is only called once when constructing or copy-constructing a Derived object. It is unspecified whether `Base::operator=' is called more than once when the implicit copy-assignment for Derived objects is invoked (as it is inside `func' in the example).
g++ implements the "intuitive" algorithm for copy-assignment: assign all
direct bases, then assign all members. In that algorithm, the virtual
base subobject can be encountered more than once. In the example, copying
proceeds in the following order: `val', `name' (via
strdup), `bval', and `name' again.
If application code relies on copy-assignment, a user-defined copy-assignment operator removes any uncertainties. With such an operator, the application can define whether and how the virtual base subobject is assigned.
protoize
The conversion programs protoize and unprotoize can
sometimes change a source file in a way that won't work unless you
rearrange it.
protoize can insert references to a type name or type tag before
the definition, or in a file where they are not defined.
If this happens, compiler error messages should show you where the new references are, so fixing the file by hand is straightforward.
protoize cannot figure out.
For example, it can't determine argument types for declaring a
pointer-to-function variable; this you must do by hand. protoize
inserts a comment containing `???' each time it finds such a
variable; so you can find all such variables by searching for this
string. ISO C does not require declaring the argument types of
pointer-to-function types.
unprotoize can easily introduce bugs. If the program
relied on prototypes to bring about conversion of arguments, these
conversions will not take place in the program without prototypes.
One case in which you can be sure unprotoize is safe is when
you are removing prototypes that were made with protoize; if
the program worked before without any prototypes, it will work again
without them.
You can find all the places where this problem might occur by compiling the program with the `-Wconversion' option. It prints a warning whenever an argument is converted.
protoize cannot get the argument types for a function whose
definition was not actually compiled due to preprocessing conditionals.
When this happens, protoize changes nothing in regard to such
a function. protoize tries to detect such instances and warn
about them.
You can generally work around this problem by using protoize step
by step, each time specifying a different set of `-D' options for
compilation, until all of the functions have been converted. There is
no automatic way to verify that you have got them all, however.
If you plan on converting source files which contain such code, it is recommended that you first make sure that each conditionally compiled region of source code which contains an alternative function header also contains at least one additional follower token (past the final right parenthesis of the function header). This should circumvent the problem.
unprotoize can become confused when trying to convert a function
definition or declaration which contains a declaration for a
pointer-to-function formal argument which has the same name as the
function being defined or declared. We recommend you avoid such choices
of formal parameter names.
This section lists changes that people frequently request, but which we do not make because we think GCC is better without them.
Such a feature would work only occasionally--only for calls that appear in the same file as the called function, following the definition. The only way to check all calls reliably is to add a prototype for the function. But adding a prototype eliminates the motivation for this feature. So the feature is not worthwhile.
Shift count operands are probably signed more often than unsigned. Warning about this would cause far more annoyance than good.
Such assignments must be very common; warning about them would cause more annoyance than good.
Coming as I do from a Lisp background, I balk at the idea that there is
something dangerous about discarding a value. There are functions that
return values which some callers may find useful; it makes no sense to
clutter the program with a cast to void whenever the value isn't
useful.
This would cause storage layout to be incompatible with most other C compilers. And it doesn't seem very important, given that you can get the same result in other ways. The case where it matters most is when the enumeration-valued object is inside a structure, and in that case you can specify a field width explicitly.
The ISO C standard leaves it up to the implementation whether a bit-field
declared plain int is signed or not. This in effect creates two
alternative dialects of C.
The GNU C compiler supports both dialects; you can specify the signed dialect with `-fsigned-bitfields' and the unsigned dialect with `-funsigned-bitfields'. However, this leaves open the question of which dialect to use by default.
Currently, the preferred dialect makes plain bit-fields signed, because
this is simplest. Since int is the same as signed int in
every other context, it is cleanest for them to be the same in bit-fields
as well.
Some computer manufacturers have published Application Binary Interface standards which specify that plain bit-fields should be unsigned. It is a mistake, however, to say anything about this issue in an ABI. This is because the handling of plain bit-fields distinguishes two dialects of C. Both dialects are meaningful on every type of machine. Whether a particular object file was compiled using signed bit-fields or unsigned is of no concern to other object files, even if they access the same bit-fields in the same data structures.
A given program is written in one or the other of these two dialects. The program stands a chance to work on most any machine if it is compiled with the proper dialect. It is unlikely to work at all if compiled with the wrong dialect.
Many users appreciate the GNU C compiler because it provides an environment that is uniform across machines. These users would be inconvenienced if the compiler treated plain bit-fields differently on certain machines.
Occasionally users write programs intended only for a particular machine type. On these occasions, the users would benefit if the GNU C compiler were to support by default the same dialect as the other compilers on that machine. But such applications are rare. And users writing a program to run on more than one type of machine cannot possibly benefit from this kind of compatibility.
This is why GCC does and will treat plain bit-fields in the same fashion on all types of machines (by default).
There are some arguments for making bit-fields unsigned by default on all machines. If, for example, this becomes a universal de facto standard, it would make sense for GCC to go along with it. This is something to be considered in the future.
(Of course, users strongly concerned about portability should indicate explicitly in each bit-field whether it is signed or not. In this way, they write programs which have the same meaning in both C dialects.)
__STDC__ when `-ansi' is not used.
Currently, GCC defines __STDC__ unconditionally. This provides
good results in practice.
Programmers normally use conditionals on __STDC__ to ask whether
it is safe to use certain features of ISO C, such as function
prototypes or ISO token concatenation. Since plain gcc supports
all the features of ISO C, the correct answer to these questions is
"yes".
Some users try to use __STDC__ to check for the availability of
certain library facilities. This is actually incorrect usage in an ISO
C program, because the ISO C standard says that a conforming
freestanding implementation should define __STDC__ even though it
does not have the library facilities. `gcc -ansi -pedantic' is a
conforming freestanding implementation, and it is therefore required to
define __STDC__, even though it does not come with an ISO C
library.
Sometimes people say that defining __STDC__ in a compiler that
does not completely conform to the ISO C standard somehow violates the
standard. This is illogical. The standard is a standard for compilers
that claim to support ISO C, such as `gcc -ansi'---not for other
compilers such as plain gcc. Whatever the ISO C standard says
is relevant to the design of plain gcc without `-ansi' only
for pragmatic reasons, not as a requirement.
GCC normally defines __STDC__ to be 1, and in addition
defines __STRICT_ANSI__ if you specify the `-ansi' option,
or a `-std' option for strict conformance to some version of ISO C.
On some hosts, system include files use a different convention, where
__STDC__ is normally 0, but is 1 if the user specifies strict
conformance to the C Standard. GCC follows the host convention when
processing system include files, but when processing user files it follows
the usual GNU C convention.
__STDC__ in C++.
Programs written to compile with C++-to-C translators get the
value of __STDC__ that goes with the C compiler that is
subsequently used. These programs must test __STDC__
to determine what kind of C preprocessor that compiler uses:
whether they should concatenate tokens in the ISO C fashion
or in the traditional fashion.
These programs work properly with GNU C++ if __STDC__ is defined.
They would not work otherwise.
In addition, many header files are written to provide prototypes in ISO
C but not in traditional C. Many of these header files can work without
change in C++ provided __STDC__ is defined. If __STDC__
is not defined, they will all fail, and will all need to be changed to
test explicitly for C++ as well.
Historically, GCC has not deleted "empty" loops under the assumption that the most likely reason you would put one in a program is to have a delay, so deleting them will not make real programs run any faster.
However, the rationale here is that optimization of a nonempty loop cannot produce an empty one, which holds for C but is not always the case for C++.
Moreover, with `-funroll-loops' small "empty" loops are already removed, so the current behavior is both sub-optimal and inconsistent and will change in the future.
It is never safe to depend on the order of evaluation of side effects. For example, a function call like this may very well behave differently from one compiler to another:
void func (int, int); int i = 2; func (i++, i++); |
There is no guarantee (in either the C or the C++ standard language
definitions) that the increments will be evaluated in any particular
order. Either increment might happen first. func might get the
arguments `2, 3', or it might get `3, 2', or even `2, 2'.
Strictly speaking, there is no prohibition in the ISO C standard against allowing structures with volatile fields in registers, but it does not seem to make any sense and is probably not what you wanted to do. So the compiler will give an error message in this case.
Some ISO C testsuites report failure when the compiler does not produce an error message for a certain program.
ISO C requires a "diagnostic" message for certain kinds of invalid programs, but a warning is defined by GCC to count as a diagnostic. If GCC produces a warning but not an error, that is correct ISO C support. If test suites call this "failure", they should be run with the GCC option `-pedantic-errors', which will turn these warnings into errors.
The GNU compiler can produce two kinds of diagnostics: errors and warnings. Each kind has a different purpose:
Warnings may indicate danger points where you should check to make sure that your program really does what you intend; or the use of obsolete features; or the use of nonstandard features of GNU C or C++. Many warnings are issued only if you ask for them, with one of the `-W' options (for instance, `-Wall' requests a variety of useful warnings).
GCC always tries to compile your program if possible; it never gratuitously rejects a program whose meaning is clear merely because (for instance) it fails to conform to a standard. In some cases, however, the C and C++ standards specify that certain extensions are forbidden, and a diagnostic must be issued by a conforming compiler. The `-pedantic' option tells GCC to issue warnings in such cases; `-pedantic-errors' says to make them errors instead. This does not mean that all non-ISO constructs get warnings or errors.
See section Options to Request or Suppress Warnings, for more detail on these and related command-line options.
| [ << ] | [ >> ] | [Top] | [Contents] | [Index] | [ ? ] |