Using C++ in gcc (was Re: [RFC] type safe trees)

[Diego Novillo]

On Fri, 2004-06-25 at 14:22, Richard Kenner wrote:
>      4) Incremental conversion to C++ idioms, where those are prudent.
> 
>     That sounds like rewriting a significant chunk of code in C++ to me. 
> 
> No, this a proposal to *require a C++ compiler*, not to invent a
> language and convert it to C.
>
Eh?  It's very clear to me that Nathan's intention is to re-write GCC in
C++, incrementally.  Something which I find appealing, btw.


Diego.