User forums > General (but related to Code::Blocks)
Changing MinGW compiler, which ships with C::B
eXpl0it3r:
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on October 13, 2014, 11:37:29 pm ---I hope you know that the C++ standard doesn't mention libraries nor command line flags and leaves them to the implementation!
--- End quote ---
I obviously wasn't talking about the C++ standard, but rather standard behavior for GCC compilers.
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on October 13, 2014, 11:37:29 pm ---Also I don't know why is this aggressive behaviour, why don't you just mention on your site that you don't support TDM and be done with it?
--- End quote ---
See my point above about "setting defaults".
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on October 13, 2014, 11:37:29 pm ---p.p.s. I hope I won't see you in a 2-3-4 years starting a topic how we should drop TDM/MinGW in favour of clang! :-* ;D
--- End quote ---
I don't see why I shouldn't.
--- Quote from: edison on October 14, 2014, 04:50:08 am ---If my memory is correctly, the dw2 posix version TDM-GCC will use dyna link as default.
--- End quote ---
Even if it does, Code::Blocks doesn't ship DW2 POSIX version, thus it doesn't matter. Again the point is, Code::Blocks is setting a "default" compiler by shipping the TDM builds and that "default" compiler is broken. Anyone should be able to use TDM if they really want, I just talk about changing the compiler that gets shipped with Code::Blocks.
oBFusCATed:
--- Quote from: eXpl0it3r on October 14, 2014, 08:16:20 am ---I obviously wasn't talking about the C++ standard, but rather standard behavior for GCC compilers.
--- End quote ---
I really doubt there is such thing as standard, also as far as I know these options you're talking about are relatively new additions to GCC.
--- Quote from: eXpl0it3r on October 14, 2014, 08:16:20 am ---
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on October 13, 2014, 11:37:29 pm ---p.p.s. I hope I won't see you in a 2-3-4 years starting a topic how we should drop TDM/MinGW in favour of clang! :-* ;D
--- End quote ---
I don't see why I shouldn't.
--- End quote ---
Because this won't help C::B to become better.
As I've said why don't you just state that you don't support TDM and be done with it?
Close any ticket related to it with invalid and go on.
eXpl0it3r:
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on October 14, 2014, 09:41:30 am ---I really doubt there is such thing as standard, also as far as I know these options you're talking about are relatively new additions to GCC.
--- End quote ---
If you're caught up too much with the word "standard", then I might have to defuse it to "default behavior" or "how ever other GCC version in existence works".
Whether they are new or old doesn't matter.
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on October 14, 2014, 09:41:30 am ---As I've said why don't you just state that you don't support TDM and be done with it?
Close any ticket related to it with invalid and go on.
--- End quote ---
Because I want to solve the issue at its root rather than just switching to "ignore mode". Again read the bit about setting a default compiler from above. This issue doesn't just touch my projects, it affects every project out there.
If you don't care what compiler gets shipped, why don't you even want to think about a change?
Again all the arguments about "use something else" or "ignore it" etc. are not actual solutions to the problem I'm presenting here. It's not just about my personal projects and the ones I'm involved with, but it's about Code::Blocks setting a default compiler for a lot of users without realizing and without admitting that their shipped compiler has major flaws.
TDragon:
--- Quote from: eXpl0it3r on October 13, 2014, 08:48:38 pm ---The compiler will generate an error when using the common -static linker flag.
--- End quote ---
Could you provide some more information about this specific problem by any chance? It's not something I've ever been made aware of, and I'd like to see if it's something I could fix. I'd be very grateful for a bug report at the TDM-GCC tracker (preventing off-topic discussion here).
Also, in the intervening time since we last conversed, TDM-GCC has changed to allow the "-static-libgcc" and "-static-libstdc++" flags as no-ops. I'm not sure if this answers your objection to the default static linkage or not, but I figured it was worth a mention. :)
-John E. / TDM
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version