This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH]: Trying to make list nodes smaller, but the C++FE keeps beating me down
- From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- To: Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
- Cc: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 08:48:48 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Trying to make list nodes smaller, but the C++FE keeps beating me down
- References: <05AF9DBA-C5B9-11D9-B3E1-003065BDF310@apple.com>
On Sun, 2005-05-15 at 20:17 -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2005, at 06:42 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > I'm totally willing to kill everyone necessary to make C++ in GCC
> > happen.
> Ok, let's line them up against the wall, who is going first?
Okay, but before we shoot anyone, i want to know if we are just going to
go through the motions again, or if we are going to actually consider
Because i'd rather not kill anyone if we're going to go through the
In fact, we can actually speed up going through the motions if we divide
up the tasks!
What we need (This list bears no resemblance to any existing people or
events, living or fictional. Really.)
1. One person who has never tried to modify the tree structure or fought
the garbage collector to say they see no advantage to using C++..
2. One person who has never contributed to say that they won't
contribute if we move to C++.
3. Two people to try to set ground rules that disqualify most of C++ on
the grounds that basically, we're too stupid to write maintainable code
on our own without some guidelines (of course, saying "We'd like our
code to look more like LLVM than Open64" would probably work, but it's
much more fun to try to disqualify shit). We need two people so that
they can argue about why the other person has it completely wrong.
4. One person to go on a rant about how bad the STL is for some reason
5. Two people who have never really used C++ to tell us it's slow and
6. One person who has never contributed to GCC to suggest NotCorC++
because it will be obviously better.
7. One conspiracy theorist to end it all by saying "Look guys, there's a
reason 'NotC' sounds like 'Nazi' when you pronounce it".
If we divide this all up, we can go through the motions in a couple days
instead of a couple weeks!