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]

Re: adding destroyable objects into Ggc

On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 01:16:03 -0500
Gabriel Dos Reis <> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:00 AM, Basile Starynkevitch
> <> wrote:
> > However, I don't often see the people arguing against Ggc talking about the difficulties
> > for GCC newscomers to dive inside GCC and be able to propose code.
> From my experience, the difficulty for newcomer to get into GCC source
> code base has less to do with GC than the compiler overall architecture
> itself.  I believe it would be naively deceptive to make people believe that
> the absence of GC is what makes or would make GCC impenetrable to newcomers.

I half agree about it. Look at Qt & GTK documentation: both starts about how
memory management of their objects should be done. And I have no idea about what the
equivalent would be for hypothetical tree-s, gimple-s, edge-s, gimple_seq-s,
basic_block-s coded in C++ with some kind of _ptr.

I do think that the fact that some other big free software starts by explaining how to
manage their memory is significant.

I also agree with you that GCC architecture is messy, and that scares newscomer a lot.


email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359
8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France
*** opinions {are only mine, sont seulement les miennes} ***

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