This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: compiler tweak offered
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 11:16:57 -0700
- Subject: Re: compiler tweak offered
--On Friday, August 30, 2002 10:56:42 AM -0700 Zack Weinberg
<zack@codesourcery.com> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 10:01:13AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
[...] I would be strongly opposed to adding [an extension] to GNU
C/C++ until and unless [it is] added to the ISO standards for those
languages.
I am not advocating the specific extension proposed by the original
poster, but I think that telling people to go bug the standards
committees is not constructive advice.
Perhaps.
There is a difference between "implemented" and "in an FSF release
of GCC". As a sometimes-committee member (not for C!), I'd like to see
a working implementation of the feature, but I wouldn't necessarily have
to see a shipping release of the feature.
I'm all for playing around with GCC to add new features; I'm just not for
adding (most) of those features to the compiler.
I don't know the dynamic of the C++ committee but I would be surprised
if it did not take the same attitude to new features.
Historically, much of C++ was standardized before anyone had implemented
it. (The "export" keyword is a classic example.)
The C++ ABI committe bravely followed this example. :-(
Anyhow, it looks like everyone who has commented -- for one reason or
another -- has suggested we not accept this feature, so perhaps we
should leave it at that.
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com