Re: off-by-one in get_ident

[Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>]

On Dec 13, 2005, at 4:11 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> We have discussed this at length before at many occasion.  At this 
> stage,
> I'm just moving on implementing our coding conventions (as has been
> pointed to you in the past when you asked the same question) -- there 
> is no
> point in having infinitely the same debate over and over again.
> Because, existing tools (working with other compiler source codes) can
> be ported to GCC and made available to the GCC community.  Some tools
> are content with 'extern "C"' around headers; but other tools are 
> better
> served with the ability to compile the sources with a C++ compiler.
> See previous debates if you want more reasons.
>
> Nobody is asking for transmuting valid C codes into invalid C codes.  
> The
> issue is about expressing the ideas in C, thus valid codes, so that
> they allow compilation with both a C or C++ compiler.  GCC will not be 
> the
> unique compiler written in a way that follow our coding conventions.

Wait valid C into valid C++ is not a good idea as it makes the code 
worse
in terms of coding style.

My point is that this is valid C and should not change just because it 
is
invalid C++.  Please don't go about and change random stuff just because
it is invalid C++.

This is where I say that C++ is not a true subset of C so it should not
even thought as such until the C++ standard fixes their mess.
Changing this is not going to fix anything except make code messier.

In fact right now all the XNEW shit (yes it is shit) makes the code
look like it was not thought through at all.  Please consider that
C++ is and never can be a true supper set of C and should never be
thought as such and should never even try to compile C code with a C++
compiler.


I have not seen any where you have said why all parts of GCC needs to be
rewritten in C++?  And what tools are needed to be fully compiled with 
a C++
compiler.  If some tools need that, they are broken and should be fixed 
instead
of changing valid C code into code which looks like a mess.

-- Pinski