From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20362 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2004 22:35:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 20338 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2004 22:35:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out4.apple.com) (17.254.13.23) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 18 Nov 2004 22:35:54 -0000 Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (a17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out4.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAIMgS0D006439 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:42:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay1.apple.com (relay1.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.14) with ESMTP id ; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:36:32 -0800 Received: from greed.local ([17.219.205.98]) by relay1.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAIMZl0r004142; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:35:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by greed.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 60E4235C8D6; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:36:00 -0800 (PST) To: Mike Stump Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, discuss-gnustep@gnu.org Subject: Re: Is ObjC++ still in time for 4.0? References: <442C1616-387F-11D9-9815-0030654C2998@hamburg.de> From: Geoffrey Keating Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:22:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00640.txt.bz2 Mike Stump writes: > On Nov 17, 2004, at 1:58 AM, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf wrote: > > I wanted to ask what the current status of Objective-C++ for > > mainline gcc is. While there have been a lot of activity on the > > gcc-patches and gcc-cvs lists several month ago it is now relatively > > silent regarding this topic. Is all the work done now or did the > > release plan slip backwards (to 4.1 or whatever)? > > Last I knew, everything was solidly wedged behind Geoff's objection > with no plan forward. The objection will either have to be withdrawn, > or Geoff will have to communicate his vision before any progress can > be made. Zem is asking me to design his frontend's data structures for him. I don't have time to do that right now, and Zem hasn't done the design work himself, so we're waiting. My last comment to Zem was: > I still don't really know enough, but my best guess is that you > should put an extra field in the lang_type structure for C, and in > lang_type_class for C++. Try that and let me know how it goes. and so far as I know, he hasn't tried it yet.