From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 926 invoked by alias); 18 May 2012 21:56:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 916 invoked by uid 22791); 18 May 2012 21:56:30 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 May 2012 21:56:17 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B52D01C6FA3; Fri, 18 May 2012 17:56:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id IOgQcnFvJ1Xl; Fri, 18 May 2012 17:56:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 467821C6F9F; Fri, 18 May 2012 17:56:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6589D145616; Fri, 18 May 2012 14:55:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 21:56:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: Pedro Alves , Jan Kratochvil , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Will therefore GDB utilize C++ or not? Message-ID: <20120518215558.GR29339@adacore.com> References: <20120330161403.GA17891@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87aa2rjkb8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <4F832D5B.9030308@redhat.com> <87ehqhfenc.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87ehqhfenc.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg00095.txt.bz2 > Pedro> And #2, the debugger is one of the first programs that is > Pedro> desirable to get running on a new system/board. Usually you get > Pedro> C going much sooner than C++. > > I think there are multiple options for this scenario. People could > start with a basic port of RDA, or an older gdbserver, or just bump up > the priority of getting C++ working. I would really like us to avoid making GDBserver a C++ program. I said in the past that I was concerned that making GDB a C++ program would make it less accessible on the less used platforms. But I am ready to accept that constraint to build GDB if it can help general development. For GDBserver, however, which is often cross-compiled to bare systems, I feel that getting a C++ compiler could be even more challenging that on those exotic but otherwise relatively rich platforms. -- Joel