This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org 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: ANSIfy cp/parser.c

From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
To: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>
Cc: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: 10 Jan 2003 13:33:08 +0100
Subject: Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
Organization: Integrable Solutions
References: <20030109030342.GA20609@doctormoo><87bs2r0wpv.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com><20030109065216.GA26264@daikokuya.co.uk><20030109213019.GA735@daikokuya.co.uk> <3E1DF443.1000604@bothner.com><20030109222016.GB1951@daikokuya.co.uk>

Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk> writes:

| Per Bothner wrote:-
| 
| > In fact, there may be maintainance advantages to having a *single*
| > executable thta handles C, C++, ObjC and ObjC++.
| 
| Possibly; I agree there are advantages to combining.  But I also think
| there are disadvantages, and that the weight of the disadvantages fall
| on C/ObjC.

Well, I do believe that the "code duplication" issue is a realistic
and killer argument.  We have datapoints showing how that beats us in
the past (and present).  However, wouldn't it be possible to set up
machinery to share codes between those front-ends? 

-- Gaby

Follow-Ups:
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Mark Mitchell

References:
- ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Nathanael Nerode
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Zack Weinberg
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Neil Booth
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Neil Booth
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Per Bothner
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Neil Booth

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