This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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: Partly rewriting gengtype in C++ ?

From: Laurynas Biveinis <laurynas dot biveinis at gmail dot com>
To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>
Cc: Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile at starynkevitch dot net>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 20:45:16 +0200
Subject: Re: Partly rewriting gengtype in C++ ?
Authentication-results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of laurynas.biveinis@gmail.com designates 10.68.73.225 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=laurynas.biveinis@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=laurynas.biveinis@gmail.com
References: <20120302150730.GA21770@ours.starynkevitch.net> <CAHkCEVdf-tB3JXYVQnTMeqiAUM-G+G59d32YQV3qtcns-SOqww@mail.gmail.com> <4F510C43.3040501@google.com>

2012/3/2 Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com>:
> It already is. ÂWe bootstrap in C++ mode. ÂI don't see a problem starting to
> move some code to C++. ÂWhether this is a good chunk of code to convert is
> another question.

Sorry, I should have been more precise and said "not the best first
module choice to convert to C++ and lose the ability to go back to
building in C."

I agree that such conversion will have to be done at some point, but
I'm not sure if a big rewrite should happen way before the rest of the
code will start to use gengtype-annotated C++ data structures.

-- 
Laurynas

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Partly rewriting gengtype in C++ ?
  - From: Diego Novillo

References:
- Partly rewriting gengtype in C++ ?
  - From: Basile Starynkevitch
- Re: Partly rewriting gengtype in C++ ?
  - From: Laurynas Biveinis
- Re: Partly rewriting gengtype in C++ ?
  - From: Diego Novillo

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