From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay7.poste.it (relay7.poste.it [62.241.4.179]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j4AKNjbw013612 for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 20:23:45 GMT Received: from flameeyes.is-a-geek.org (151.44.28.135) by relay7.poste.it (7.2.052.3) (authenticated as emanuela.zanon@poste.it) id 4210C3E3000E004E for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 22:23:55 +0200 From: "Diego 'Flameeyes' =?utf-8?q?Petten=C3=B2?=" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] dev-lang/icc and dev-lang/ifc candidates for removal Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 22:20:04 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <20050510053621.GG26049@exodus.wit.org> <4280F817.6060402@gentoo.org> <1115755908.27166.12.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> In-Reply-To: <1115755908.27166.12.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart62005288.eh7XutJKaN"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200505102220.13709@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> X-Archives-Salt: 96c6d2df-eef7-43a3-9059-4c020b4e85d2 X-Archives-Hash: 05468c3666eee531ff2a0641a5e52b2b --nextPart62005288.eh7XutJKaN Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 10 May 2005 22:11, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > You are correct. However, it might be necessary to patch something that > won't compile with icc, but does compile with gcc. I think this is the > primary reason for the icc USE flag. Isn't tc-* functions there also for this? And anyway, there can be patches which makes something work both with icc a= nd=20 gcc. When I worked a bit with icc, I found out that it was just stricter than gc= c,=20 but all the changes needed to be done for icc was right also for gcc (and=20 usually stopped gcc from throw a warning on something). Probably with gcc4 many of the errors are now shared by both compilers as i= t=20 turned up even more strict than before. =2D-=20 Diego "Flameeyes" Petten=C3=B2 Gentoo Developer (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64) http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ --nextPart62005288.eh7XutJKaN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCgRd9e2h1+2mHVWMRArzGAKCIK0CxIMpnVF9vdFAD7mvyjhxNQACfSPgf QPfosc3pz+4eHTyBetWsjpc= =rhxg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart62005288.eh7XutJKaN-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list