From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2908 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2004 23:56:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 2899 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2004 23:56:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out3.apple.com) (17.254.13.22) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 25 Oct 2004 23:56:01 -0000 Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (a17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out3.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i9Q010Ze024260 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:01:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay4.apple.com (relay4.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.14) with ESMTP id ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:56:05 -0700 Received: from [17.201.24.57] (polskifiat.apple.com [17.201.24.57]) by relay4.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i9PNthkB024976; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:55:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <417D8F67.5070105@coyotegulch.com> References: <42A6DEB0-26D4-11D9-9558-000D9330C50E@apple.com> <8354E669-26DE-11D9-B761-000D9330C50E@apple.com> <417D8F67.5070105@coyotegulch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <5CE57982-26E1-11D9-B761-000D9330C50E@apple.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, "Joseph S. Myers" From: Ziemowit Laski Subject: Re: New C parser [patch] Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:28:00 -0000 To: Scott Robert Ladd X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg02136.txt.bz2 On 25 Oct 2004, at 16.42, Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > Ziemowit Laski wrote: >> While I don't buy these time estimates (not both simultaneously, >> anyway), I do >> agree that you would take a performance hit, at least in the >> short-term, >> especially for plain C code. > > I don't think this is a hit GCC's users can afford at this point. > Another compile time regression may bring the hordes with pitchforks > and torches... ;) That's probably true, esp. if you're asking users to migrate from the likes of CodeWarrior or Visual C++. :-( > > Also, C and C++ are heading down different and incompatible paths. It > will be increasingly difficult to manage the subtle-but-important > differences in a single front end if the two languages continue to > diverge. So I take it there is no hope of the divergence being halted (let alone reversed)? Or am I the only one who sees this divergence as an aberration? :-) --Zem