🚀 go-pugleaf

Keith Thompson wrote:
> frank <frank@example.invalid> writes:
> [...]
>> Given this intention, would you say this is an appropriate compile
>> command line:
>>
>> dan@dan-desktop:~/source$ gcc -D_GNU_SOURCE -Wall -Wextra rd3.c -o out
>>
>> ?  I'm not sure where I picked up -Wall and -Wextra.  Are they both
>> still useful?
> 
> I'm not going to comment on the -D_GNU_SOURCE portion of this (due to
> a lack of expertise), but I will say something about the "-o".
> 
> When compiling and linking a source file "foo.c" to create an
> executable, the convention is to call the executable "foo":
> 
>     gcc ... foo.c -o foo
> 
> (It might be something like "foo.exe" on non-Unix-like systems.)
> 
> When compiling a source file "foo.c" to create an object file without
> linking, the convention is to call the object file "foo.o":
> 
>     gcc -c ... foo.c -o foo.o
> 
> or just:
> 
>     gcc -c ... foo.c
> 
> since "foo.o" is the default output name.
> 
> You are of course free to call your output files whatever you like,
> but I suggest following these conventions unless you have a good
> reason not to.
> 

Added to my linuxlog.
--