This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [RFC] Changing the implementation language of the fortran front-end
- From: "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: jimmie dot davis at l-3com dot com
- Cc: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 10:17:03 +0100
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Changing the implementation language of the fortran front-end
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=i/lr2UCvLnVcpnNzM71nr5L1Tc9rqaDY20eR36Sb640=; b=n2764eyP2OTp4s71mc4K/M7X0brvOqjAZYEKS+b3jb+55MoOJ6L03JCJ9/9MsV3xlx16flfsg5D3DGCatM4oa0GIEzHhypo/rasCX2hEwe9TJrRguupvJmZDIy6Vdl/vNNdXx6ULfETJ4qaxnMKMOdmv5OBEEjse+2NEBbJGW74=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=T08WI+Kzrpe0meYIri2AByJybSHNE0zrUCwIgxYfhUAh1AulycCsMd3uIE05WTteDm2k9h+bwt44PG0ovv2cTfYStqxYVqq9lUTw2JIJCTi5q+4DU6PqDMpTizqHj1ijQ+ZWs61Sccyc+csl0e/DZ62QJUTAC0IsQO0SBrj1+MI=
- References: <46835D054D115449BBE84934E2F200090196B04C@ARLEXCHVS02.lst.link.l-3com.com>
On Dec 2, 2007 3:36 AM, <jimmie.davis@l-3com.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Do we have any feelings on the feasibility of changing the fortran
> front-end from C to say C++ (or fortran, or ada for those most
> rebellious) ?
>
> The ability to use STL containers, IMHO, would make the code easier to
> read, simpler, and (also IMHO) better all around.
>
> Downsides:
>
> #1. Have to build g++ and the g++ libraries prior to compiling
> gfortran.
> #2. The executable (might) be larger.
>
> Upsides:
> #1. STL.
>
>
> I don't think it would be hugely hard to make this change.........
>
> Comments ?
The parts interfacing to the middle-end (trans-*.c) probably requires
to "harden"
some middle-end interfaces against abuses of C++ keywords and some other things.
But this would be actually a good thing, since quite some of the middle-end
developers would like to go towards using C++ in the middle-end itself.
Downside number #1 is actually no problem in practice unless you do not
want to suffer the extra build time.
Richard.