From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "E. Robert Tisdale" To: egcs@egcs.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Named Return Value Extension Proposal Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 23:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: <36F7029D.F0EE48E8@netwood.net> X-SW-Source: 1999-03n/msg00738.html Message-ID: <19990331234600.CbiokZZJRxx_Vaq3litQCWGhRIgrnR1_Gplhc-lyEak@z> Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > I don't know what will be decided, > but let me throw my 0.02 euros in there. > I certainly don't minimize the importance of compiler level optimizations. > But it's my opinion that there are ISO C++ language features-- > not optimizations-- that need to be fixed or implemented in the compiler. > That already is a lot of work to do. I'm not particularly interested > in seeing a lot of work spent in implementing nonstandard features, > that will probably badly interact with ISO C++, > whereas there are more fundamental topics waiting to be addressed. > > So my proposal will be: let's first catch up the Standard, > then we'll address optimizations issues. > > Just because a particular optimization is _permitted_ > doesn't mean that the compiler *should* implement it, > particularly when the compiler is trying hard to get semantics right. Gaby, You and I will both grow very old and die before this compiler catches up with the standard. I don't think that it is too unreasonable for me and other users to expect the compiler to produce reasonably fast and efficient code without hacking our source to work around a deficient optimizer. It appears from the reply by Jason Merrill to the "elided copy constructors" thread that it will be a very long time before the changes can be made to implement the optimizations permitted by the standard. I am simply proposing a stop gap to carry us through until it is possible to implement the optimizations. I have taken some pain to ensure that the proposed extensions will not interact badly with the ANSI/ISO C++ standard. Please let us know if you see something wrong that I don't see. > just my 0.02 euros. I'll see your 0.02 euros and raise you $0.02 E. Robert Tisdale