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: Switching to C++ by default in 4.8

On 04/11/2012 09:45 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> I have been having difficulty following the twists and the turns and
> the goal post moving.
> Are you essentially requiring to see GCC rewritten in C++ before we
> switch to C++?

Frankly, despite all this discussion, we still don't really know what
the people who insist on a C++ conversion actually want to do. We've
seen trivial suggestions like rewriting vec.[ch], which isn't really
going to make a big difference in the grand scheme of things, but
everything else has remained vague. At the GCC gathering last year we
saw a presentation which made me feel like language features had just
gone in search of possible applications, which doesn't fill me with a
lot of confidence either.

So yes, I would like some significant part rewritten in the way the C++
folks would like to see it, so we can actually judge what we will get.
And that's moving my personal goal post from "hell no" somewhere closer
to what the C++ proponents would like.

The incremental approach (tearing down the barrier of stage1 being
compiled in C first and then getting things in piecewise) may seem like
a path of less resistance, but we can't afford to have a thread like
this for every change, and I wouldn't like to see us decide after 100
patches that the end result sucks and we have to either live with it or
revert the lot.

IMO, gimple might be worth trying to convert, since it's the newest code
in gcc and presumably already half-way to what people consider a
"modern" style (lots of annoying little functions that get in the way
while debugging).

But I suspect that when such a branch has been done, it will still come
down to personal preference as to which variant is best. This is why I
still think the whole thing is deeply misguided, as it's not about
objective technical issues, but merely about language preferences, and
everyone has a different one. You can't match everyone's taste in a big
project, and thus real developers have to adapt to a project, not the
other way round. Discussions like this are a toxic distraction from real

IMO it would be best if we could find a majority of global reviewers to
speak out and say once and for all "no, this just isn't happening", so
we can drop all this nonsense and get back to improving the compiler for
users. The second best thing would be to have a branch with actual work
done for us to consider.


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