Re: non coherent options, switches and descriptions

[Paul Koning <pkoning at equallogic dot com>]

>>>>> "Neil" == Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.demon.co.uk> writes:

 Neil> Paul Koning wrote:-
 >> Incompatible changes that are necessary to add useful new
 >> functions are one thing; incompatible changes to satisfy some
 >> abstract sense of CLI esthetics are much harder to justify.

 Neil> The plan was to drop -V entirely.  If it has some common
 Neil> semantics elsewhere, e.g. meaning "version number" across GNU
 Neil> utilites, we may as well use the freed switch to mimic that
 Neil> functionality.  Sorry if that wasn't clear (I guess I sent the
 Neil> mail to people whom I anticipated having the background of past
 Neil> discussions about -V, sorry).

 Neil> The plan to drop it came from the fact that it breaks all the
 Neil> time; it certainly broke in 3.0.  If we integrate cpp0 into cc1
 Neil> for 3.2 it will likely break again.  This is only for cpp; I'm
 Neil> sure it breaks for other parts of GCC too.

I missed that piece.  Sure, if it doesn't currently work (for a
significant number of cases) then it would be reasonable to get rid of
it.

	paul