| Message ID | CA+=Sn1=ZY=_GLPusvj=BSZMwQ3-367d1s2eKCoy86BPQpkpsWg@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > The support -combine was removed a while back but cc1 still accepts > more than one file if directly invoked. The support for multiple > files has bit-rotten inside the C front-end now too. This patch now > errors out when invoked with more than one file instead of crashing > later. > > OK? Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-linux-gnu with no regressions. Ok, but can you please simplify the following code then? The i = 0; for (;;) { ... if (++i >= num_in_fnames) break; and the code following the break should be no longer needed, no? Thanks, Richard. > Thanks, > Andrew Pinski > > c-family/ChangeLog: > * c-opts.c (c_common_post_options): Move the error message about "two > or more source files" such that it is unconditional.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:36 AM, Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> The support -combine was removed a while back but cc1 still accepts >> more than one file if directly invoked. The support for multiple >> files has bit-rotten inside the C front-end now too. This patch now >> errors out when invoked with more than one file instead of crashing >> later. >> >> OK? Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-linux-gnu with no regressions. > > Ok, but can you please simplify the following code then? The > > i = 0; > for (;;) > { > ... > if (++i >= num_in_fnames) > break; > > and the code following the break should be no longer needed, no? Yes. Let me resubmit the patch. Also will this still be accepted even though we are in stage 4? Thanks, Andrew Pinski > > Thanks, > Richard. > >> Thanks, >> Andrew Pinski >> >> c-family/ChangeLog: >> * c-opts.c (c_common_post_options): Move the error message about "two >> or more source files" such that it is unconditional.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 2:17 AM, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:36 AM, Richard Biener > <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> The support -combine was removed a while back but cc1 still accepts >>> more than one file if directly invoked. The support for multiple >>> files has bit-rotten inside the C front-end now too. This patch now >>> errors out when invoked with more than one file instead of crashing >>> later. >>> >>> OK? Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-linux-gnu with no regressions. >> >> Ok, but can you please simplify the following code then? The >> >> i = 0; >> for (;;) >> { >> ... >> if (++i >= num_in_fnames) >> break; >> >> and the code following the break should be no longer needed, no? > > Yes. Let me resubmit the patch. Also will this still be accepted > even though we are in stage 4? I suppose it's a regression, so yes. Richard. > Thanks, > Andrew Pinski > >> >> Thanks, >> Richard. >> >>> Thanks, >>> Andrew Pinski >>> >>> c-family/ChangeLog: >>> * c-opts.c (c_common_post_options): Move the error message about "two >>> or more source files" such that it is unconditional.
Index: c-family/c-opts.c =================================================================== --- c-family/c-opts.c (revision 232313) +++ c-family/c-opts.c (working copy) @@ -928,6 +928,10 @@ c_common_post_options (const char **pfil #endif } + if (num_in_fnames > 1) + error ("too many filenames given. Type %s --help for usage", + progname); + if (flag_preprocess_only) { /* Open the output now. We must do so even if flag_no_output is @@ -944,10 +948,6 @@ c_common_post_options (const char **pfil return false; } - if (num_in_fnames > 1) - error ("too many filenames given. Type %s --help for usage", - progname); - init_pp_output (out_stream); } else