------- Comment #4 from esigra at gmail dot com 2008-05-06 18:00 ------- (In reply to comment #3) > 2) Standards are not freely distributable, thus they are not widely available.
You say that as if it was a general fact, but it is certainly not. For example the Ada reference manual is available right here: [http://www.ada-auth.org/arm.html] More correct would be to say that *some* standards are not widely available. > Finally, if you still think it is worth it, you could implement it yourself > as a wrapper to the output of GCC (similar to how colorgcc [*] works). You must mean similar to how colorgcc *not* works. colorgcc is just an ugly hack that should be scrapped and burned as soon as GCC is fixed to format its own output properly. What colorgcc tries to do is total nonsense. It tries to parse localized output! Of course it fails for 94% of the supported languages (only English sort-of works as far as I know). Even English may fail if there is a version mismatch. And seriously, what is more efficent, adding a colour code sequence to the string constant in GCC that says "warning:" or having separate scripts for each combination of locale and GCC version, that parse the output of GCC and recreates it with colour codes? What would distributions prefer to maintain? -- esigra at gmail dot com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |esigra at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31983
