This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Using C++ in GCC is OK
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Diego Novillo <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:09, Steven Bosscher <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Richard Guenther
>> <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> And we definitely should not do so just because we can. ?I see
>>> little value in turning our tree upside-down just because we now
>>> can use C++ and make everything a class rather than a union.
>> If hiding the structure of the data types matters, then 'tree' should
>> be re-done as a class, shouldn't it? Otherwise, how are you going to
>> get rid of all the accessor macros and static inline functions that
>> only half-hide the underlying structures?
> I agree. ?Richard, why do you think turning tree into an appropriate
> class hierarchy would not be useful?
It's a lot of work (tree extends in all three Frontends, middle-end
and backends). And my fear is we'll only get a halfway transition -
something worse than no transition at all.