http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46097
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey Walton <noloader at gmail dot com> 2010-10-21 02:00:51 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > I had a look at Cryptopp-SO-Test-1.zip > > <SNIP> > > I can see some value in the warning you want, but it's not going to help if > you > don't use the compiler correctly (maybe I'm being unfair and you're using it > correctly for 32-bit, but my first instinct is that if it fails to build for a > different target then *something* is wrong!) For completeness, while trying to avoid a pissing contest: I agree the file should have been (and should be) correct wrt x64 (I should have walked it over to an x64 machine and tried it). And I know my *nix skills are rusty - its been over 10 years since I needed them. The last time I used them was circa RedHat shipping a broken compiler, which I believe occurred at RedHat 4.0 or 5.0 (back then, we usually had to rebuild our own kernel due to poor network card support and drivers that were worse). Finally, the feature request and the underlying reason for the request are not really related. Despite poor sample code on my part, I believe programmers and package maintainers could benefit from the ability to have GCC issue warnings during compilation, rather than using objdump or nm later to tease out the information later. Jeff
