Using C++ in GCC is OK
Mon May 31 15:15:00 GMT 2010
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Richard Guenther
> And we definitely should not do so just because we can. I see
> little value in turning our tree upside-down just because we now
> can use C++ and make everything a class rather than a union.
If hiding the structure of the data types matters, then 'tree' should
be re-done as a class, shouldn't it? Otherwise, how are you going to
get rid of all the accessor macros and static inline functions that
only half-hide the underlying structures?
More information about the Gcc