From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27827 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2012 09:15:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 27815 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Apr 2012 09:15:34 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com (HELO mail-ob0-f175.google.com) (209.85.214.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 09:15:21 +0000 Received: by obbuo13 with SMTP id uo13so63172obb.20 for ; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 02:15:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.18.137 with SMTP id w9mr23404501oed.7.1333530921117; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 02:15:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.92.168 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 02:15:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4F7B356E.9080003@google.com> Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 09:15:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Switching to C++ by default in 4.8 From: Gabriel Dos Reis To: Richard Guenther Cc: David Edelsohn , Diego Novillo , gcc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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/msg00086.txt.bz2 On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis > wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:13 PM, David Edelsohn wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Diego Novillo wro= te: >>>> >>>> We would like to start the process to make GCC 4.8 build in C++ mode by >>>> default. >>>> >>>> The mechanics of the change are simple enough. =A0I volunteer to test = changing >>>> the default on all primary targets (assuming I can get them from the G= CC >>>> build farm). >>> >>> I appreciate the motivation, but this may cause major problems on >>> non-GNU/Linux platforms. =A0Testing on all primary targets is not >>> enough. >>> >>> Do you expect GCC to be able to bootstrap starting from a vendor C++ >>> compiler or will this require G++? >> >> I would expect that we use C++03, and any C++ compiler. > > Yes. =A0Thus, for stage1 we should force -std=3Dc++03 -pedantic if we > build with GCC to > avoid creep in of GNU features. Fully agreed. > Btw, I think we should only start forcing C++ when 1) there is a > branch/patch out > that shows benefit from using C++. =A0I previously mentioned that I'd lik= e to see > 2) a patch that _properly_ wraps a C++ class for consumption by our garba= ge > collector (thus, not a hack that works for a specific case but infrastruc= ture > that we think will work for _all_ cases, including libstdc++ container us= e). I was actually thinking starting with abstractions that do not interact dir= ectly with the memory manager, because I would like us to get our feet wet before doing the full plunge. Such a work would be confined to a part of the compiler (say the C++ front-end). Any particular reason you would like to start with the garbage collector which touches just about anything? -- Gaby