Re: Compiling GCC with g++: a report

[Paul Koning <pkoning at equallogic dot com>]

>>>>> "Gabriel" == Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net> writes:

 Gabriel> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/codingconventions.html

 Gabriel> Avoid the use of identifiers or idioms that would prevent
 Gabriel> code compiling with a C++ compiler. Identifiers such as new
 Gabriel> or class, that are reserved words in C++, should not be used
 Gabriel> as variables or field names. Explicit casts should be used
 Gabriel> to convert between void* and other pointer types.

I hope that doesn't require (void *) casts for pointer arguments
passed to the likes of memcpy...

 Gabriel> If converting GCC to C++ is your ultimate goal, then I don't
 Gabriel> think you should block these patches.  They do not introduce
 Gabriel> C++, but also they do provide a path to local experiments
 Gabriel> before we ever have any huge fight about that.  I do not
 Gabriel> think converting GCC to C++ is on the table or will happen
 Gabriel> any time soon -- see previous long discussions.  However, I
 Gabriel> do not believe it would help the GCC project to block any
 Gabriel> patch that bring us in alignment to our own committment.  We
 Gabriel> can have our cake and it.  I.e. we can have the source code
 Gabriel> in a form compilable with a C++ compiler and test
 Gabriel> conjectures/experiments.

I think that's a good argument.

I also find the argument of better type checking persuasive, whether
or not it has yet caught a user-visible bug.

    paul