Re: Windows FFI patch

> > Does this harm gcc?
>
> I'm afraid it does: the arguments are usually C files and -l options
> for libraries, and the libraries are scanned in the order they appear.
> Put them too early, and it fails to find a symbol defined in a later
> file.  Perhaps we should make it vary.

What if we move the -o option before the filename? Then there won't
usually be a warning, which is better.

Thanks

Neil