[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] stat: port to xlc 12.01

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: [PATCH] stat: port to xlc 12.01
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 12:31:32 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1

Bruno Haible wrote:

So, now, I prefer to do these platform conditions at one level OR the other -
not both.

Makes sense.

people auditing builds have to deal with these compilations that do nothing.

Who is doing that? Which rules are these people applying to decide whether
something is problematic? I would guess that empty object files are perfectly

Yes they're OK, but they're one more thing. Compiling these .o files slows down the build and lengthens the build log slightly. People who read the build logs will reasonably wonder "why is a w32 file being compiled on a non-w32 platform"?

So if it's a choice of level and either possibility is easy, I'd rather see this done at the "should I compile this .c file?" level, rather than at the "should this .c file be empty?" level.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]