From: Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
Date: 2011-11-18T18:12:47+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:41134] Re: mkmf sets CFLAGS to contain flags that it shouldn't be setting

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 02:12, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

> Though 1.8 has been announced as "dying" already, set both of
> $warnflags and CONFIG['warnflags'] to an empty string, if you want to
> support it still.

Half the purpose is providing Unicode and UTF-8 support to the 1.8
series, so this is by requirement, not desire.

>> And I still don���t believe Ruby should be telling me what optimizations
>> to apply, as, for example, gcc may bomb with my code for -O3 but not
>> with -O2.

> Even from your point, it seems good thing that CFLAGS are grouped by
> their purpose, doesn't it?

Yes, that I cannot deny :-).