From: Phil Edwards <phil@codesourcery.com>
To: Gregory John Casamento <greg_casamento@yahoo.com>
Cc: Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf <lars.sonchocky-helldorf@hamburg.de>,
Mike Stump <mrs@apple.com>,
gcc@gcc.gnu.org, discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Is ObjC++ still in time for 4.0?
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 23:17:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041117230536.GA6006@disaster.jaj.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041117224033.7788.qmail@web41601.mail.yahoo.com>
On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 02:40:33PM -0800, Gregory John Casamento wrote:
> Guys.. This type of outburst is atypical coming from me, but I must say
> this...
>
> Argh!! C'mon... c'mon... c'mon... ObjC++ has been perpetually forthcoming for
> the past two years! What does it take to get Objective-C++ in? It has been
> so frustrating waiting for this. There is *so much software* which would be
> trivial to reuse once this is done.
>
> Please, just get past all of the politics and get it in!
Lots of screaming and yelling about "just do it," but nobody in the ObjC++
community so far has answered the objections brought up the last time.
Politics aren't what's keeping it out. Front-ends aren't popularity
contests; the GCC maintainers aren't going to suddenly start checking in
troublesome code just because X number of potential users really, really
want it. If you want it in 4.0, then start answering questions and propose
cleaner designs than the ones so far.
--
Behind everything some further thing is found, forever; thus the tree behind
the bird, stone beneath soil, the sun behind Urth. Behind our efforts, let
there be found our efforts.
- Ascian saying, as related by Loyal to the Group of Seventeen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-17 23:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-17 10:28 Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf
2004-11-17 20:51 ` Mike Stump
2004-11-17 21:53 ` Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf
2004-11-17 22:28 ` Ziemowit Laski
2004-11-17 22:54 ` Gregory John Casamento
2004-11-17 23:02 ` Nicolas Roard
2004-11-17 23:31 ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-11-17 23:17 ` Phil Edwards [this message]
2004-11-17 23:50 ` Alex Perez
2004-11-18 0:06 ` Joe Buck
2004-11-18 0:35 ` Gregory John Casamento
2004-11-18 0:46 ` Gregory John Casamento
2004-11-18 0:53 ` Mark Mitchell
2004-11-18 1:18 ` Giovanni Bajo
2004-11-18 23:22 ` Geoffrey Keating
2004-11-18 23:28 ` Gregory John Casamento
2004-11-19 0:57 ` Ziemowit Laski
2004-11-19 1:26 ` Rogelio Serrano
2004-11-19 1:41 ` Helge Hess
2004-11-19 4:26 ` Gregory John Casamento
2004-11-19 5:49 ` Matt Austern
2004-11-19 6:42 ` Ziemowit Laski
2004-11-19 7:52 ` Phil Edwards
2004-11-22 3:22 ` Chuck Robey
2004-11-22 10:07 ` Phil Edwards
2004-11-22 10:31 ` Ranjit Mathew
2004-11-19 19:44 ` Dale Johannesen
2004-11-19 20:04 ` Dan Grillo
2004-11-19 20:08 ` Dave Korn
2004-11-19 13:31 Richard Kenner
2004-11-19 20:22 ` Ziemowit Laski
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=20041117230536.GA6006@disaster.jaj.com \
--to=phil@codesourcery.com \
--cc=discuss-gnustep@gnu.org \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=greg_casamento@yahoo.com \
--cc=lars.sonchocky-helldorf@hamburg.de \
--cc=mrs@apple.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).