[RFC] type safe trees

[Matt Austern]

On Jun 25, 2004, at 2:50 PM, Richard Kenner wrote:

>     Exactly.  Kenner is makeing this issue as if there were a proposal
>     to write GCC usinf full C++.  Thre is no such proposal.
>     There is a useful subset of C++ that is close to C, yet powerful
>     enough to free us reinventing wrong wheels all the time.
>
> Right, but a lot of us (hardly just me) are concerned that once we take
> the above first step, it will be inevitable that we will continue
> taking steps in that direction.

Is that because you think that all of the C++ language would be
genuinely useful in writing the compiler, or because you think
that people would use language features that aren't useful?

Again, I find this argument a bit peculiar.  It relies on thinking
that some language features would be demonstrably harmful,
but also that there would be no reason for anyone to avoid
using any language features.  I don't see how those arguments
can both be true.

			--Matt