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: [using gcc book] ch1 objective-c blurb

Colin Douglas Howell <> writes:


| > | > Does this accurately reflect things? Is there anything else that
| > | > should be
| > | > mentioned?
| > | | My first thought about this is that while some discussion of
| > Objective C
| > | may be called for, the paragraph you propose above is completely unnecessary.
| > I disagree.  Especially given what you say below.  My comments do not
| > concern Objective-C, since I know next to nothing about it.
| [I've snipped Gabriel's very interesting comments, which throw in doubt the GCC
| manual's comparison between G++ and other C++ compilers which generate
| intermediate C source.]
| It seems to me that, given your comments, there is even less reason
| for Chris's original proposed paragraph above, since you point out
| that the generation of a C-based intermediate form does not imply
| inferior code quality.  So why did you  say, "I disagree"?

My disagreement has to do with assertions along the lines that Cfront
was a preprocessor (since targetting C).

-- Gaby

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