Re: C++'s 'export' Keyword?

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>]

Matt Austern <austern@apple.com> writes:

| But yes, if we choose to implement export then it will be a major task.
| It probably won't be as hard for us as it was for EDG, partly because
| the
| second implementation is always easier than the first and partly because
| EDG has volunteered to help anyone who's planning to implement export.
| (EDG wants to have the first and best export implementation, but they
| don't
| want to have the only one.)  No denying that it's a big project, though.
| That's why nobody has started work on it yet.

Oh yeah, it is a big project.  Something that may probably span two
major GCC release cycles as it would need us
   (1) to clear up communications between the parser and the rest of
       semantics analysis -- e.g. have an infrastructure that makes us
       repressent C++ programs in their most abstract/generic forms
   (2) to modularize the compiler -- this part may prove politically
       involved; 
   (3) to have support in binutils and some build tools.

I have been thinking for a while whether tools like XTI/XPR you worked
on with Bjarne won't be very useful here (it has changed a bit these
last months).

-- Gaby