From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17212 invoked by alias); 11 Apr 2012 11:41:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 17204 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Apr 2012 11:41:28 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 11:41:13 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q3BBel8U029860 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 11 Apr 2012 07:40:47 -0400 Received: from stumpy.slc.redhat.com (ovpn-113-143.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.143]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q3BBejJx008508; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 07:40:46 -0400 Message-ID: <4F856DBB.9060402@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 11:41:00 -0000 From: Jeff Law User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eric Botcazou CC: Gabriel Dos Reis , Bernd Schmidt , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Miles Bader , Torvald Riegel , Jakub Jelinek , Xinliang David Li , Richard Guenther , David Edelsohn , Diego Novillo Subject: Re: Switching to C++ by default in 4.8 References: <4F7B356E.9080003@google.com> <201204110942.59922.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <201204111010.14910.ebotcazou@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <201204111010.14910.ebotcazou@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00405.txt.bz2 On 04/11/2012 02:10 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> Expressing an idea in C takes me more lines (roughly 2-3 fold) than >> in C++, so I am a bit puzzled by your observation. > > We're specifically discussing vec.[ch] here, which is a clever attempt at > implementing vectors in C, with macro magic all over the place. > So can someone convert vec.[ch] on a branch so that we can see exactly what the cost/benefits are for situation that most believe is the most compelling for switching? If that's successful, then propose and convert second hunk on that same branch to show that the benefits aren't isolated to vec.[ch]. I tend to think there's benefit to moving to a subset of C++, but I have some of the concerns raised by Jakub and others. Being able to see firsthand how the code changes from a readability standpoint, how the changes affect compilation speed, bootstrap times, debugability, etc would be a big step towards relieving some of those concerns. Jeff