Re: gcc-in-cxx branch created

[Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>]

Ivan Levashew <I.Levashew@bluebottle.com> writes:

>> Your comment makes little sense in context.  Nobody could claim that
>> the existing gengtype code is simple.  Not many people understand how
>> it works at all.  In order to support STL containers holding GC
>> objects, it will need to be modified.
>
> I'm sure there is a library of GC-managed components in C++.

I'm sure there is too.  In gcc we use the same data structures to
support both GC and PCH.  Switching to a set of C++ objects is likely
to be a complex and ultimately unrewarding task.


>> I don't know what you mean by your reference to the Cyclone variant of
>> C, unless you are trying to say something about gcc's use of garbage
>> collection.
>>
>
> Cyclone has many options for memory management. I don't know for sure
> if there is a need for GC in GCC at all.

I would prefer it if gcc didn't use GC, but it does, and undoing that
decision will be a long hard task which may never get done.

> Cyclone has a roots not only in C, but also ML. Some techniques like
> pattern matching, aggregates, variadic arrays, tuples looks to be more
> appropriate here than their C++'s metaprogrammed template analogues.

I guess I don't know Cyclone.  If you are suggesting that we use
Cyclone instead of C++, I think that is a non-starter.  We need to use
a well-known widely-supported language, and it must be a language
which gcc itself supports.

Ian