On 9/2/22 10:54, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 9:00 AM Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: >> >> On 9/1/22 13:18, Richard Biener wrote: >>> I presume WarnRemoved will diagnose use of -gstabs but not fail >>> compilation. Will -gstabs then still enable -g (with the default debug >>> format)? >> >> No, it won't set -g option. > > That was the usual side-effect - I wonder if we want to emit extra > diagnostic when one of the obsolete options is given but -g is not > enabled in the end or whether we want to preserve the debug info > enablement effect?
I would leave it for now and see if somebody would complain about the current behavior. > >>> >>> Please followup with a gcc-13/changes.html entry. >> >> Sure. >> >>> >>> I notice we have VMS_DEBUGGING_INFO left. From a quick look >>> it is used by alpha*-dec-* (exclusively) and ia64-hp-*vms* (maybe >>> also supports DWARF, it is ELF at least). One of the goals of >>> non-DWARF removal was to get rid of debug hooks and instead allow >>> "free-form" early debug generation from the frontends. >> >> Can you please explain what you mean by the free-form and what's expected >> to do with the VMS_DEBUGGING_INFO macro? > > Well, VMS debugging would go, just like STABS. Can go now, or shall we deprecate it in GCC 13 first? > With "free-form" I mean > that frontend code could call into the dwarf2out API directly, creating > DWARF DIEs for language specific info (we probably want to export more > and/or nicer APIs for such use). Ok, so bypassing dwarf2_debug_hooks, right? I can leave it to you such API improvement. What do you think? Cheers, Martin > > Richard. > >> Cheers, >> Martin
