This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Implementing Universal Character Names in identifiers
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: loewis at informatik dot hu-berlin dot de (Martin v. Löwis)
- Cc: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 01 Nov 2002 15:49:31 -0700
- Subject: Re: Implementing Universal Character Names in identifiers
- References: <200210280715.g9S7FdI2003815@paros.informatik.hu-berlin.de><20021028075111.GB1273@codesourcery.com><j4wuo39c6o.fsf@informatik.hu-berlin.de><20021028183910.GC24090@codesourcery.com><8765vi1inl.fsf@fleche.redhat.com><j4d6ppmxug.fsf@informatik.hu-berlin.de><87bs59vyn5.fsf@fleche.redhat.com><j4d6pphxm5.fsf@informatik.hu-berlin.de>
- Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com
>>>>> "Martin" == Martin v Löwis <loewis@informatik.hu-berlin.de> writes:
>> However, the ability to use these is part of the Java language
>> specification. So we have a strong preference for supporting them on
>> all platforms. We already do that by mangling the identifiers when we
>> see a non-ascii character.
Martin> There are many things in the Java language specification that
Martin> gcj does not do, or does not do equally well on all systems.
I don't understand this point. It is true that we don't implement
everything perfectly. But that doesn't imply that we're willing to
implement fewer things well.
Martin> Since you can get GNU binutils for all systems
Is that really true?
Martin> OTOH, I would not like to see two different approaches for g++
Martin> depending on the platform, and compatibility with C *is*
Martin> important for g++ - so I'd let g++ be guided rather by the C
Martin> requirements than by the Java requirements.
This seems reasonable. I think we're unlikely to see a bug report if
this change is made. However, if one comes it, it would clearly be a
regression.
Tom