From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6407 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2012 14:17:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 6390 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Dec 2012 14:17:31 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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; Tue, 04 Dec 2012 14:17:19 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qB4EHHcV027726 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:17:17 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-104.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.104]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qB4EH9Bk016343 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:17:14 -0500 Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 14:17:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: gdb@sourceware.org Cc: Tom Tromey , Matt Rice , Yao Qi Subject: Re: Will therefore GDB utilize C++ or not? Message-ID: <20121204141708.GA28600@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20120330161403.GA17891@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87aa2rjkb8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <4F8FD047.6030702@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F8FD047.6030702@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2012-12/txt/msg00012.txt.bz2 On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 10:43:51 +0200, Yao Qi wrote: [...] > maybe, we can start from something easy and less-controvesy, > > On 04/05/2012 04:47 AM, Tom Tromey wrote: > > 1. Modify GDB so it can be compiled with -Wc++-compat. > > This would be the first patch series. There is already an archer > > branch for this. > > Modify GDB as well as GDBserver/IPA so they can be compiled with > -Wc++-compat. > > > 2. Then, change GDB to compile with a C++ compiler (-Wc++-compat is > > not complete). This would be the second patch series. > > > > Change to use C++ compiler to compile GDB, GDBserver and IPA. If this > is too aggressive, we can use C++ compiler to compile GDB and keep C > compiler to compiler GDBserver and IPA. Sources in gdb/common/ will be > compiled by C compiler and C++ compiler respectively. Is it possible? For one of the justifications of C++ http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2012-11/msg00070.html speficially to upstream the 64-bit inferior offsets/sizes as present in many patches posted by Siddhesh Poyarekar : It would be enough to have GDB (neither gdbserver nor IPA) compilable as C++. Explicit configure option would be required. It would be used to create the 64-bit offsets patch and then also during nightly regression testing to catch possible following 64-bit offsets type violations/regressions. Is it enough plan to justify the -Wc++-compat compatibility step? That is to update and check-in archer-ratmice-compile-Wc++-compat. Thanks, Jan