This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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]

Re: Using C++ in GCC is OK

From: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
To: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 20:09:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Using C++ in GCC is OK
References: <mcrhblnnuz3.fsf@dhcp-172-17-9-151.mtv.corp.google.com> <xnzkzepj8q.fsf@greed.delorie.com> <mcrwruiihi8.fsf@dhcp-172-17-9-151.mtv.corp.google.com> <AANLkTik9pWKYXihpKBik_JDh3U00WVfomdYvwDOU6FyA@mail.gmail.com> <mcrfx16ialj.fsf@dhcp-172-17-9-151.mtv.corp.google.com> <4C059F01.4090107@codesourcery.com>

> gold is using this convention, isn't it?

I find the gold sources harder to read than the rest of binutils, and
would like to avoid propogating that style elsewhere.  This from
someone who's been writing C++ code for twenty years now.

Also, gold was added to binutils without this type of discussion about
what C++ style should be used for a formerly-C project, so please
don't use it as an example of The Right Thing To Do.

References:
- Re: Using C++ in GCC is OK
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Using C++ in GCC is OK
  - From: DJ Delorie
- Re: Using C++ in GCC is OK
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Using C++ in GCC is OK
  - From: Jonathan Wakely
- Re: Using C++ in GCC is OK
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Using C++ in GCC is OK
  - From: Bernd Schmidt

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