This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [wwwdocs] Update coding conventions for C++
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: Lawrence Crowl <crowl at google dot com>
- Cc: Chiheng Xu <chiheng dot xu at gmail dot com>, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>, gcc-patches List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>, Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>, Richard Guenther <rguenther at suse dot de>, Martin Jambor <mjambor at suse dot cz>, Miles Bader <miles at gnu dot org>, Magnus Fromreide <magfr at lysator dot liu dot se>, Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 09:43:19 -0500
- Subject: Re: [wwwdocs] Update coding conventions for C++
- References: <CAGqM8fZqRJ-bFQAiMWBP==99ae=ePKUcEwCvQyotuw4Sh=SKDA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGqM8fbU2d7v_aG--LqGhmzi1dOGcHq030BdaSndR6yvT4Ud3A@mail.gmail.com> <CAD_=9DQ5+ie-P0yr8XJBb0EFQmqB7k5XLCh6LtqMn1wX8n6Q4g@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1206251857380.17603@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <CAGqM8fa=GmKqpPSo-z_m4KcQ2KOTzP3QVLPwzyi_NzdNeMbEAg@mail.gmail.com> <CAGqM8fa2pUWeJm-1rwMLntMc9EAGAp57ys0KEcCcWQP2856rhA@mail.gmail.com> <20120626124513.GB1641@virgil.arch.suse.de> <CAGqM8fYBVqrz-tC_t6r8vO8vN=PCdDaDcCQH_VgLHFScg+9vdg@mail.gmail.com> <20120627132149.GA9901@virgil.arch.suse.de> <CAGqM8fb518gQ69iFSpjOae+UVAxs8xxy8_QDsxvNipdOcHwefw@mail.gmail.com> <CAGqM8fYrwc_1Ldy9+8EPgq1q1ufSSQbSvj7B4JDnUK0KE2-1tg@mail.gmail.com> <CAGqM8fYvdvft3Ecm3Gw-+xZtGLXVmKauPuvDJdSRS0b+prsgBg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Lawrence Crowl <crowl@google.com> wrote:
> Resend, as I replied to a message that didn't have the usual suspects
> on the cc line.
>
> On 6/27/12, Lawrence Crowl <crowl@google.com> wrote:
>> ..., does anyone object to removing the permission to use C++
>> streams?
>
> Having heard no objection, I removed the permission.
This is an area where I think we should not be too
prescriptive. Clearly, the diagnostics machinery will be used
for anything diagnostics -- so whether IOStreams are
allowed or not would not change that. On the other hand, I feel
we should defer to maintainers' discretion in specific areas
whether people are implementing dumping or other I/O facilities
not related to diagnostics, since as I you correctly pointed out,
there is an added value of flexiibility and expressivity.
In summary: Instead of blanket ban, I would suggest that uses
for C++ I/O streams be reserved for non-diagnostics purposes
and left at the discretion of maintainers.
>
> The following patch is the current state of the changes. Since the
> discussion appears to have died down, can I commit this patch?