delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2001/07/09/13:15:11

From: "Tim Van Holder" <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
To: <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: Comments on GCC 3.0 distribution
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:15:44 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEGKOHJKAAFPKOCLHDIOEDNCFAA.tim.van.holder@pandora.be>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010709164740.8678D-100000@is>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com

> But the version of djgpp.env that users have on their machines, which
> comes from djdev203.zip, does specify CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH, and it points
> to lang/cxx, not lang/cxx-v3.  Won't this break C++ programs, especially
> if the users don't remove previous installation?

My guess is that the built-in paths take precedence over CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH,
so it would behave OK.

> > >   - "cxxfilt --version" says something like
> > >
> > >      GNU d:/foo/bar/baz/bin/cxxfilt.exe (C++ demangler), version 3.0
> > >
> > >     I think this is ugly; I suggest that the leading directories and
> > >     the .exe extension be removed.
> >
> > It simply outputs argv[0]. Of course it would be possible to call
> > basename(argv[0]) for DJGPP only. Only question - is it really needed.
>
> I think it's a good idea not only for DJGPP: if you invoke
> "/foo/bar/bz/cxxfilt --version" on Unix, it will print its full path as
> well.  I think this is ugly.  The intent of that message is to announce
> the _name_ of the program, not its full path.
>
> Granted, this is a minor nuisance, so if you think it's not important,
> feel free to disregard.

Well, the GNU coding standards say this shouldn't really be computed from
argv0 anyway (it should be the canonical name of the program).
Having said that, I would certainly agree that basenaming it would be a
good idea, since many GNU tools seem to do it that way.

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019