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] |
On 03/18/2015 01:21 PM, Oleg Endo wrote:
I think Trevor had some good comments, particularly WRT overloading. I think that in general we want to avoid those kind of overloads.On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 22:31 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:I'm not a big fan of keeping the FOR_EACH_blah style iterator and would prefer to use real C++ iterators. But it ought to give you some ideas about how to start breaking these things out.BTW I've tried to propose to start doing that (using C++ 'standard' iteration concepts) a while ago: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-12/msg01129.html Unfortunately the discussion didn't go anywhere. Maybe the patch could serve as a starting point for something/somebody.
I do agree with your assertion that utilizing standard facilities, makes understanding an existing code base easier. That applies to iterator styles, exploiting code in the standard library, etc etc.
WRT discussion dying off, yea, that will tend to happen with proposals made in mid December -- folks are focused on regression bugfixing, then the holidays, then more regression bugfixing. Things like this just aren't a priority.
jeff
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |