This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Switching to C++ by default in 4.8
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 7:44 AM, David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> 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? ?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,
>> it removes options from those that build GCC or at least makes building
>> GCC unnecessarily bigger hassle.
>> 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).
>
> Part of the reason this discussion is not reaching a consensus is
> because it is not addressing the real issue. ?The challenge is how to
> make GCC an attractive platform for developers -- how to attract new
> developers.
>
> Among FOSS compilers, LLVM attracts developers. ?Other than licensing
> and politics and marketing, the anecdotal comments from developers
> mention C++ as a technical reason.
>
> And other than existing GCC developers who are comfortable with the
> current C codebase, I think some participants in this thread are
> concerned that the C++ complaint is a red herring. ?In other words,
> some developers resist GCC because it does not match their comfort
> zone and when asked for a technical reason, C++ is an easy answer. ?I
> think some members of the GCC community have a nagging concern that
> even if GCC goes through the pain of transitioning to C++, it will not
> move the ball on attracting developers, but will divert resources and
> will discourage existing developers.
On the other hand, it may also attract additional resources to help
out. Not changing anything is certainly not going to help here.
thanks,
David