Re: Switching to C++ by default in 4.8

[Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com>]

On 10/04/2012 17:24, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> 
>>>>>             exp->as_component_ref().get_field() ..
> 
>>> Actually it's not questionable.  The above stuff is _horrible_.
>> Specifics please.  It is _horrible_ because you are more used to the 
>> existing way and the new style does not match your taste or they are 
>> very hard to understand and use?
> 
> Your style (I wouldn't call it The New Style) is visually distracting, and 
> therefore harder to understand and use, longer to write and full of 
> syntactic noise without any whitespace.  Quite frankly, how anyone could 
> ever say that
> 
>   exp->as_component_ref().get_field()
> 
> is easier to read/write/use than
> 
>   GET_FIELD_DECL (exp)
> 
> (say when we #define GET_FIELD_DECL(x) TREE_OPERAND(x,1)), with or without 
> all-caps, is completely beyond me.  I pretty much hope that we never see 
> the ugliness of the first way in GCCs code base.  Even in C++ it's 
> possible to write non-spaghetti code.

  So isn't

#define GET_FIELD_DECL(exp) ((exp)->as_component_ref().get_field())

the simple solution to that one?

    cheers,
      DaveK