This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C++'s new 'export' Keyword?
- From: Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:04:34 -0500
- Subject: Re: C++'s new 'export' Keyword?
> :-) I would rather see a bit faster C++ compiler than implemented export.
> Is this feature so usefull?
It is not, I don't give a damn about it. But Gaby is saying that the
paper is bad and was debunked, but not *how the committee's view has
changed*. If the debunking was so important, I'd expect that he
told us why export is so great.
And BTW let's stop saying that gcc is volunteer-driven. There are
surely a lot of great volunteers, but most of the important people
are paid to work on it. I like tree-ssa very much; but tangentially,
I doubt that it would have been what it is (and I doubt that it
would be included in mainline) without Red Hat and CodeSourcery's
push: Diego, Richard, Jeff, Andrew, are all Red Hat employees,
gfortran's Paul Brook and our beloved release manager are at
CodeSourcery. If one of Red Hat or CodeSourcery's clients believed
that export is important, we'd already have an implementation of it.
Free software is a nice philosophy but nowadays most free software
projects are used because they are open-source. :->