This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Converting GCC to compilation with C++
- From: "Gabriel Dos Reis" <gdr at acm dot org>
- To: "Paolo Bonzini" <bonzini at gnu dot org>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Joe Buck" <joe dot buck at synopsys dot com>,"Mark Mitchell" <mark at codesourcery dot com>, nathan at codesourcery dot com
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:01:54 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: Converting GCC to compilation with C++
- References: <40F2C9D5.20703@codesourcery.com> <32805.::ffff:128.194.146.35.1089667109.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <20040712142843.A7657@synopsys.com> <40F34A8D.2010601@gnat.com> <32794.::ffff:24.250.169.187.1089704266.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <40F3F25F.4070507@gnat.com> <40F3F75A.409@gnu.org>
- Reply-to: gdr at acm dot org
Paolo Bonzini:
>> I would remove from my subset overloading, any kind of
>> inheritance
>
> Inheritance seems to me the most rewarding point in switching to C++.
> C++ without inheritance is strongly typed C.
>
>> , virtual functions
>
> Given the current amount of hooking in GCC (target, host, language,
> profiling, RTL) virtual functions seem worthwhile too.
I'm amazed at seeing how people prefer brittle hacks to working
codes. Virtual functions are guranteed to be set properly,
once for while. Currently, we do not have such invariants and
we have to do everything hands with more opportunities to make
mistakes.
-- Gaby