[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions
From: |
Jan Djärv |
Subject: |
bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions |
Date: |
Sun, 9 Jun 2013 08:56:55 +0200 |
Hello.
9 jun 2013 kl. 02:52 skrev Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>:
> On 06/06/13 09:42, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>
>> Having XCONS and friends duplicated into a macro version and a function
>> version is a non-starter for me.
>
> Yes, I didn't like those macros either. I'll remove them; they're no
> longer needed now that GCC has the -Og option. In case you haven't
> run into it yet, -Og means "optimize for debugging", and causes GCC to
> generate code that's easy to debug, without having the big runtime
> performance penalty of -O0.
Which version of gcc has this? Note that most people does not have the latest
gcc version.
Jan D.
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, (continued)
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Stefan Monnier, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/13
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Stefan Monnier, 2013/06/13
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/15
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Stefan Monnier, 2013/06/15
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/17
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions,
Jan Djärv <=
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Jan Djärv, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Juanma Barranquero, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Jan Djärv, 2013/06/09
bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Barry OReilly, 2013/06/10