[RFC] type safe trees

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

You Wrote

> Seriously, how about we just require that GCC be built with a C++
> compiler that supports whatever features it is that we require?  At

Well, you know what I'm going to say :-) :-)

> first, that would be classes, with single inheritance, and no member
> functions.  Nothing more -- no templates, no virtual functions, no
> exceptions, etc.  That's a subset that even Cfront handled 100%
> correctly, AFAIK.  We could add to the subset over time, but the goal
> would be to keep it small enough that we never had any trouble
> bootstrapping.

100% agreed.

-- Gaby