This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Heads-up: volatile and C++
- From: Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
- To: Marcin Dalecki <martin at dalecki dot de>
- Cc: "Michael N. Moran" <mike at mnmoran dot org>, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 15:38:07 -0700
- Subject: Re: Heads-up: volatile and C++
On Friday, April 15, 2005, at 03:19 PM, Marcin Dalecki wrote:
You can read it as, it was and will always be, just a bad idea.
When will be a full and standard conforming template implementation in
GCC finished then?
?
Seriously, what does that have to do with anything?
I know, let's not recommend C for device driver programming, because
there doesn't exist a C compiler that doesn't have a bug in the world.
My claim would be, there is a reasonable portable subset of C, or C++
that one can use in their endeavors. Further, while in 1992, this
subset maybe didn't reasonably include templates, that in 2005, it does.
If for you, it doesn't, well, ok, fine.
Go research why that thing that I refuse to even name, doesn't include
templates, report back here, when you have the answer. Don't accept
the marketing explanation either. I can then check, and see if your
answer matches mine. We can then discuss if, at the time, it made for
a good decision for the so named subset, it did not.