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 Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Jakub Jelinek <> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 08:20:05AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> The reason why I am mystified is that the people who seem to argue
>> that it would be pointless to convert the existing codebase to C++ seem
>> to be the same people who insist on seeing significant part of GCC
>> converted to C++ before we switch to *building* stage1 with a C++ compiler.
> What is so puzzling about it?

what is puzzling is that if people believe it is pointless to convert
the existing
codebase to C++, why are they insisting to see that happen before
*building* stage1 with a C++ compiler?

>?If we don't have a proof that what the GCC in
> C++ proponents are wanting is actually beneficial for GCC, then just
> switching building stage1 to C++ is not a step in the right direction,

There is a distinction between converting existing codebase to C++
(which some people think is pointless) and making it possible to add
*new functionalities* written in C++.

> it removes options from those that build GCC or at least makes building
> GCC unnecessarily bigger hassle.

If that is your real point, how requiring people to rewrite GCC in C++
before the switch to *build* statge1 with a C++ compiler is going to
fix that or address that?

> If the switch followed by several conversions to C++ is done on a branch
> only and the merits are then judged afterwards, we don't do the problematic
> step on the trunk until it actually gives some benefits (if ever).

But the primary goal isn't to convert GCC to C++, but to allow new
to be written in C++.

-- Gaby

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