Is there a way to enforce gcc to ignore errors which result from C++11's override?
Explanation: I want to enable C++11 in a program. Unfortunately it misused some functions and macros from a library causing many marked override, but does not override errors. So I want to disable the error, just to check if there are more issues and then replace the errors step by step.
I checked the -W options, but they handle warings only. This is a real error.
As a hack you can use -Doverride= on the command line. This will make it so GCC does not see override.
Related
This is a problem that I've faced multiple times before. I download a project and type make, but it won't compile because warnings are being treated as errors. I want to override this and I don't care about the risks. I also don't want to hunt through the source code to look for every flag. So how do I get projects to compile using make without warnings being treated as errors on the command line?
I'm trying to use ccache to speed up my rebuilds and I noticed this in the log:
[2015-04-17T10:41:45.845545 27682] Compiler option -M is unsupported
[2015-04-17T10:41:45.845584 27682] Failed; falling back to running the real compiler
In my experience you need something like the -M flag in order to have make or its equivalent trigger rebuilds correctly. It seems weird that ccache would be tripped up by an option that must be in almost every project's build. Am I missing something? Is there a more preferred option?
This is w/ ccache-3.2.1.
Edit: I tried with -MM as well, no luck.
It is correct that ccache currently doesn't support the compiler options -M and -MM (and it never has supported them).
Some reasons for why the options in question are unupported:
The options tell the compiler to let the preprocessor output make rules instead of the preprocessed source code. This is not a good match for how ccache works; it needs to get hold of the "real" preprocessed output for each compiler invocation (see https://ccache.dev/manual/3.7.11.html#_how_ccache_works).
Nobody has implemented support for the mentioned options, simply put.
It would most likely be possible to implement support by letting ccache run the compiler command twice: one without -M/-MM to retrieve the preprocessed source code (with which the result should be associated) and one with -M/-MM to retrieve the result (make rules).
However, I (speaking as the ccache maintainer for the last six years) have not heard anybody missing support for -M/-MM until now, so my impression is that -M/-MM actually aren't used much.
Am I missing something? Is there a more preferred option?
Yes, I would say that the standard way is to use -MD/-MMD (which are supported by ccache) instead of -M/-MM. -MD/-MMD are superior because they produce both the .o and the .d file in one go, whereas -M/-MM only produce the .d file, so the compiler must in that case be invoked twice by the Makefile for each source code file. See for instance http://www.microhowto.info/howto/automatically_generate_makefile_dependencies.html for how to use -MD/-MMD.
I am learning compilers and want to make changes of my own to GCC parser and lexer. Is there any testing tool or some another way available which let me change gcc code and test it accordingly.
I tried changing the lexical analysis file but now I am stuck because I don't know how to compile these files. I tried the compilation using other GCC compiler but show errors. I even tried configure and make but doing this with every change does not seems efficient.
The purpose of these changes is just learning and I have to consider GCC only as this is the only compiler my instructor allowed.
I even tried configure and make but doing that wit every change is not at all efficient.
That is exactly what you should be doing. (Well, you don't need to re-configure after every change, just run make again.) However, by default GCC configures itself in bootstrap mode, which means not only does your host compiler compile GCC, that compiled GCC then compiles GCC again (and again). That is overkill for your purposes, and you can prevent that from happening by adding --disable-bootstrap to the configuration options.
Another option that can help significantly reduce build times is enabling only the languages you're interested in. Since you're experimenting, you'll likely be very happy if you create something that works for C or for C++, even if for some obscure reason Java happens to break. Testing other languages becomes relevant when you make your changes available for a larger audience, but that isn't the case just yet. The configuration option that covers this is --enable-languages=c,c++.
Most of the configuration options are documented on the Installing GCC: Configuration page. Throroughly testing your changes is documented on the Contributing to GCC page, but that's likely something for later: you should know how to make your own simpler tests pass, by simply trying code that makes use of your new feature.
You make changes (which are made "permanent" by saving the files you modify), compile the code, and run the test suite.
You typically write additional tests or remove those that are invalidated by your changes and that's it.
If your changes don't contribute anything "positive" to the compiler upstream will probably never accept them, and the only "permanence" you can get is the modifications in your local copy.
With GCC and clang, I've been able to use SCons 'TryCompile' feature to build a simple configure check to determine if the currently configured compiler supports a given compile flag. Basically, clone the env, add the flag in question to CFLAGS, CCFLAGS, or CXXFLAGS, as appropriate, execute TryCompile, and if the TryCompile succeeds, then the flag is supported and we can add it to the real env.
This works perfectly with gcc, because unknown flags are errors and the compiler exits with a non-zero status.
With clang, it works reasonably well too: clang by default treats unknown errors as warnings, but if you pass it -Werror it will turn unknown flags into errors. So my wrapper around TryCompile just always passes -Werror along with the flag to be tested if it knows we are using clang.
However, this all falls over with the Microsoft toolchain because as far as I can discover, there is no way to convince the compiler to treat unknown flags as errors: they are always warnings, even if you pass the flag to make warnings errors. Since the compile exits cleanly wither or not the flag is accepted, TryCompile always succeeds. See this question for details on the various attempts I have made to get MSVC to exit with a non-zero status.
Any ideas on how I can make this work? Is there another SCons facility that I'm overlooking that can do this job for me? Should I interpose on TryCompile on MS platforms and parse the compiler output rather than examining the exit status. I'm really happy with using TryCompile for configure time flag detection with clang and gcc, but if I can't get MSVC to cooperate I'm going to need to abandon this whole approach, and I'm pretty loathe to do that since it is working so well so far.
Leave it to Windows to rain on the parade once again :) Obviously the Windows compiler always returns success, irregardless of what happens.
I can think of several options that you could try.
First of all, SCons provides a Multi-Platform Configuration (Autoconf Functionality) which may help you achieve the same result. It doesnt include anything for compiler options, but does at least includes the following:
Checking for the Existence of Header Files
Checking for the Availability of a Function
Checking for the Availability of a Library
Checking for the Availability of a typedef
Adding Your Own Custom Checks
Another option would be to build some sort of a dictionary with the Microsoft compilation options. You would probably need one dictionary per compiler version. This particular option would probably take a long time to prepare, and probably wouldnt be worth it.
Another option would be to use the Object() or Program() builder instead of the TryCompile() builder, and try to catch the failure and react accordingly. Im not sure if SCons allows you to catch compilation failures as an exception and carry on if it fails, but its worth checking into.
In my makefile I specify -Werror=uninitialized, but no errors occur.
I changed it to -Wuninitialized, and I see my warning. -Wno-uninitialized makes it go away as expected, but why isn’t -Werror=uninitialized working?
Also it was suggested in code I write
#pragma GCC diagnostic error "-Wuninitialized"
But that does not work either. Why?
I have another question, but unfortunately none of the suggestions are working for me.
You should use -Werror. This option doesn't have any parameters (it is an on/off switch).
But it is good practice to remove all warnings, so -Werror enforces this good practice.