From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11591 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2012 01:35:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 11550 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Apr 2012 01:35:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,KHOP_THREADED,MISSING_HEADERS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_VIA_APNIC,TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from outbound.icp-osb-irony-out9.iinet.net.au (HELO outbound.icp-osb-irony-out9.iinet.net.au) (203.59.1.110) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 01:35:08 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlADAOlHfk9yxkew/2dsb2JhbAANOLV4ghiEAwEBAQMBOEABBQsLDRQWDwkDAgECAUUTAQcCiAW6QZBLBJt9jRs Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.0.10]) ([114.198.71.176]) by outbound.icp-osb-irony-out9.iinet.net.au with ESMTP; 06 Apr 2012 09:35:05 +0800 Message-ID: <4F7E4849.1090104@netspace.net.au> Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 01:35:00 -0000 From: Russell Shaw User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101030 Icedove/3.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Will therefore GDB utilize C++? Not. References: <20120330161403.GA17891@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87aa2rjkb8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <201204042155.q34LtJNB013402@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <4F7D8603.90801@redhat.com> <201204060034.q360Yo0m007419@new.toad.com> In-Reply-To: <201204060034.q360Yo0m007419@new.toad.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2012-04/txt/msg00052.txt.bz2 On 06/04/12 10:34, John Gilmore wrote: ... > I do not recommend that GDB use C++. I agree 100% on all points. I came to the same conclusions 10 years ago. Everything i do now is C, and i only poke with C++ to grab something out of it or to reverse engineer. Most C++ programmers i've seen have this mentality that they don't need to know what's "under the hood" such as what some library is doing or how inefficient it is. As a result, you get layers upon layers upon layers of absolute crud piled sky high. OTOH, i don't recommend trying to emulate C++ in plain C, or you end up with a maintenance disaster like GTK. All it requires is a few more short lines of explanatory design notes scattered through the code and clarity of thought.