This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Converting to ISO C89
- From: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>, mark at codesourcery dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
- Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 16:33:13 -0800
- Subject: Re: Converting to ISO C89
- References: <200303250642.h2P6gZ4r025932@doubledemon.codesourcery.com><m3llz3btqx.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net><1048612019.25895.7.camel@doubledemon.codesourcery.com><200303251752.MAA08671@caip.rutgers.edu><or8yuopmoo.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com> writes:
> On Mar 25, 2003, "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu> wrote:
>
>> IMHO once we've decided to require ISO C89 to bootstrap, we should
>> remove gcc-isms from the cp/ dir and compile cc1plus during stage1.
>> We can perhaps condition cc1plus during stage1 iff java is enabled.
>
>> Then java (and all other) frontends can use C++ wherever it makes
>> sense.
>
> It's not that simple, unfortunately. Without libstdc++, there's not
> much of C++ any language can possibly use.
This is true, but I think Kaveh's patches are worthwhile anyway.
> /me thinks if we're to use C++ in the compiler, it makes more sense to
> require a complete, functional C++ compiler upfront, and use it in all
> stages.
Or we could do as I suggested before and bootstrap *only* the C (and
Ada, if requested) compiler, then build the other front ends with
their runtime libraries.
zw