From: Pedro Alves <pedro@palves.net>
To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
Cc: David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>,
gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add gcc/make-unique.h
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 19:41:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56684bbd-b056-ecd6-f01b-924b838ec3fe@palves.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b692ac64-8461-b0b5-c48e-ae6f02f96c70@palves.net>
On 2022-07-12 7:36 p.m., Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 2022-07-12 7:22 p.m., Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 12 Jul 2022, 17:40 Pedro Alves, <pedro@palves.net <mailto:pedro@palves.net>> wrote:
>>
>> On 2022-07-12 4:14 p.m., Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> >> So once GCC requires C++14, why would you want to preserve
>> >> once-backported symbols in a namespace other than std, when you no longer have a reason to?
>> >> It will just be another unnecessary thing that newcomers at that future time will have
>> >> to learn.
>> >
>> > I also don't see a problem with importing std::make_unique into
>> > namespace gcc for local use alongside other things in namespace gcc. I
>> > do consider that idiomatic. It says "the make_unique for gcc code is
>> > std::make_unique". It means you only need a 'using namespace gcc;' at
>> > the top of a source file and you get access to everything in namespace
>> > gcc, even if it is something like std::make_unique that was originally
>> > defined in a different namespace.
>> >
>>
>> If that's the approach, then GCC should import std::unique_ptr, std::move,
>> std::foo, std::bar into the gcc namespace too, no? Are you really going
>> to propose that?
>>
>>
>> No, I don't follow the logic of "if you do it for one thing you must do it for everything". That's a straw man. But I don't really mind how this gets done. Your suggestion is fine.
>>
>
> It isn't a strawman, Jon. Maybe there's some miscommunication. The conversion started (and part of it is
> still quoted above), by thinking about what we'd do once we get to C++14, and my suggestion to optimize
> for that. When we get to the point when we require C++14, make_unique is no longer different from any other
> symbol in the std namespace, and there will be no reason to treat it differently anymore. Like, if someone at
> that point proposes to remove the global make_unique or gcc::make_unique, and replace all references with
> std::make_unique, there will be no real ground to object to that, why wouldn't you want it? This is very
> much like when you removed "gnu::unique_ptr" (not going to miss it) a few months back -- you replaced
> it by "std::unique_ptr"; gnu::unique_ptr wasn't kept just because of history.
Sorry to reply to myself -- but I'm not sure it is clear what I meant above in the last sentence, so let
me try again: 'the "gnu::unique_ptr" wasn't rewritten as an import of std::unique_ptr into the gnu namespace
just because of history.'
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-12 18:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAH6eHdSnGwtScODMveYha1S5WiDo6YsexN_pRqe9n4vq-Pmkig@mail.gmail.com>
2022-07-12 0:25 ` David Malcolm
2022-07-12 0:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] analyzer: use std::unique_ptr for pending_diagnostic/note David Malcolm
2022-07-12 6:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] Add gcc/make-unique.h Jonathan Wakely
2022-07-12 8:13 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-10-26 20:40 ` [PATCH v3] " David Malcolm
2022-11-02 21:45 ` Jason Merrill
2022-07-12 13:23 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Pedro Alves
2022-07-12 13:45 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-07-12 14:06 ` Pedro Alves
2022-07-12 15:14 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-07-12 16:40 ` Pedro Alves
2022-07-12 18:22 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-07-12 18:36 ` Pedro Alves
2022-07-12 18:41 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2022-07-12 18:58 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-07-12 18:59 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-07-12 18:50 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-07-12 18:56 ` Pedro Alves
2022-07-12 18:36 ` David Malcolm
2022-07-12 18:49 ` Pedro Alves
2022-10-21 16:01 David Malcolm
2022-10-25 23:00 ` David Malcolm
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56684bbd-b056-ecd6-f01b-924b838ec3fe@palves.net \
--to=pedro@palves.net \
--cc=dmalcolm@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jwakely.gcc@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).