This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] type safe trees
- From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
- To: nick at dsvr dot net
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 25 Jun 04 11:31:47 EDT
- Subject: Re: [RFC] type safe trees
This would only be an issue if you are using C++ features like exception
handling and class definitions that require vtables and
constructors/destructors to be handled by the linker.
Right, that's what I said.
The proposal was to use only a tiny set of C++ features.
The *current* proposal. But I think everybody agrees that once we take
that first step, it's going to get easier and easier to add more. There's
the real question, given human nature, of whether it's best not to take
that first step.
That's basically what I see as the heart of the debate.