This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Two suggestions for gcc C compiler to extend C language (by WD Smith)

> It *isn't* "putting every possible feature into every language."
> Did I ever advocate that?

Yes.  When you say "X is a useful feature, therefore we should put it
into language Y", you are indeed implicitly advocating that.  Because
if that were *not* the case, then saying that X is *useful* says
nothing whatever about whether it should be put into Y: there will
be dozens, if not hundreds, of useful feature that will not be in Y.

> Am I making syntax more complicated? No. I am if anything
> suggesting making it simpler by removing arbitrary rules that only
> complicated situation.  Am I making compiler more complicated? No,
> the code to do this was already written (just with different numbers),
> and by doing what I say the compiler could actually be simplified
> in some ways.

You are making the *language* more complicated because you cannot look
at each feature in isolation, but rather must look at how they
interact with the other features of the language, among other issues.

As I said, please study language design concepts before continuing this

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]