Re: [RFC] Switching implementation language to C++

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

Basile Starynkevitch wrote:

> You forgot to mention plugins. In my understanding, any future GCC
> plugin would necessarily be coded in C++ and be compiled by a C++
> compiler. Am I right?

Not necessarily.  If we felt it desirable, the interface exposed for
plug-ins could be C, not C++.  However, I would expect it would be
better to expose a C++ API.  We'll have to see what consensus emerges on
that point.

(I do not feel that plug-ins should have full access to GCC's internals;
I want to see a structured API that permits plug-ins access to a
documented, stable interface.)

> I would even imagine that later, one could configure GCC to have only a
> C++ front-end, but no more a C one.

I suppose, though thinking about that doesn't seem a great use of time
at this point.

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713