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]

Using C++ in gcc (was Re: [RFC] type safe trees)

On Jun 25, 2004, at 8:31 AM, Richard Kenner wrote:

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.

I'm still not sure whether I think that it's a good idea to use C++ in gcc. I'm pretty sure of these two things, though: (1) I don't believe the argument above is a good reason not to use C++. The argument above has two parts: that once we start using any parts of C++ there will be no reason not to use all of the language, and that this will have bad consequences because some parts of the C++ language are unsuitable for our purposes. Either part of that argument might be true, but both can't be. (2) Writing gcc in C++ is a better idea than writing it in an invented language of our own that gets turned into C by specially written tools. (And that's true whether or not we call what we're doing an invented language, and whether or not we give that new language a name.) All the arguments against C++ are even more true for this.

If we think that pure C meets our needs, then that's fine.  If we
don't, then we should be looking for an alternative language
that might serve us better.  C++ is one reasonable candidate.
There are others.


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