This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GSoc-2015: Modular GCC (RFC on refactoring)
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Oleg Endo <oleg dot endo at t-online dot de>
- Cc: Mikhail Maltsev <maltsevm at gmail dot com>, gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 21:06:28 -0600
- Subject: Re: GSoc-2015: Modular GCC (RFC on refactoring)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAA_ASpVFs7LXS4Pw1Mxo5VCxtEncvYXjYgnULGoRAWnbM3PkYw at mail dot gmail dot com> <54F87A48 dot 6070803 at redhat dot com> <54FA52CD dot 2080003 at gmail dot com> <54FB1C2B dot 7010108 at redhat dot com> <5508F5F3 dot 500 at gmail dot com> <5508FF96 dot 6020008 at redhat dot com> <1426706475 dot 11894 dot 6 dot camel at yam-132-YW-E178-FTW>
On 03/18/2015 01:21 PM, Oleg Endo wrote:
I think Trevor had some good comments, particularly WRT overloading. I
think that in general we want to avoid those kind of overloads.
On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 22:31 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
I'm not a big fan of keeping the FOR_EACH_blah style iterator and would
prefer to use real C++ iterators. But it ought to give you some ideas
about how to start breaking these things out.
BTW I've tried to propose to start doing that (using C++ 'standard'
iteration concepts) a while ago:
Unfortunately the discussion didn't go anywhere. Maybe the patch could
serve as a starting point for something/somebody.
I do agree with your assertion that utilizing standard facilities, makes
understanding an existing code base easier. That applies to iterator
styles, exploiting code in the standard library, etc etc.
WRT discussion dying off, yea, that will tend to happen with proposals
made in mid December -- folks are focused on regression bugfixing, then
the holidays, then more regression bugfixing. Things like this just
aren't a priority.