Re: RFA: Deprecate C++ options

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

> Thanks from one of those who will be caused minor headaches (probably
> several day's work if you do this and one wants to use a recent compiler)
> for working with very old (unmaintained but essential) code (consisting of
> thousands of line of now incorrect C++), but all are easily fixed (with
> hours of work that will need to be done by every single individual using
> the unmaintained code).

There's no need to be sarcastic.  If you don't like Nathan's proposal,
just say so.

Here's a serious question, not meant to be facetious in any way.  Would
you rather have support for these old constructs, or other improvements
to the compiler, including better support for the lanaguage as specified
in the standard, better optimizations, and (especially) fewer bugs?
(These pre-ISO features take a disproportionate amount of work to
keep working, especially as new features are added, and they tend to
get broken often.)

I think a rational person could answer either way.  What's your
opinion?

-- 
Mark Mitchell                mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC            http://www.codesourcery.com