From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 52122 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2016 14:47:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 49149 invoked by uid 89); 11 Oct 2016 14:47:54 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=buys X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:47:44 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6E1F1168DB; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:47:42 -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 U2EDsW+oGlde; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:47:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0415116894; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:47:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 13340423DC; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 07:47:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:47:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pedro Alves Cc: "Metzger, Markus T" , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce gdb::unique_ptr Message-ID: <20161011144741.GF3813@adacore.com> References: <1476117992-5689-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <1476117992-5689-2-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <20161011121639.GE3813@adacore.com> <68fc02cb-59bc-012c-d1be-b5ed2076d6a5@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <68fc02cb-59bc-012c-d1be-b5ed2076d6a5@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00259.txt.bz2 > In the particular issue of an owning smart pointer, I think the > shim as I'm proposing buys us some time, and unblocks a lot more > struct cleanup elimination and simplification of the codebase. > I'd still propose going forward with it immediately. That would make sense to me. > > Note that I wouldn't necessarily think in purely in terms of which > > version of GCC supports it, but also consider whether want to support > > building GDB with non-GCC compilers, particularly on the more exotic > > systems out there, where it can be hard to build GDB. Do all these > > compilers support C++11? Probably not. > > Looking at: > > https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/Systems > > I think we're pretty much down to not-that-exotic hosts nowadays. > At least, all hosts there seem to me like should have working > gcc or clang ports. Agreed. Mostly, I was thinking of seeing if we can avoid the requirement to build a GCC first, if all you are interested in is actually building GDB. But, if C++11 is a much cleaner language overall, and its runtime provides some nice additions, I think it makes better sense technically to align ourselves to it. We've already made a huge requirement jump; let's just do it right all the way. That increment doesn't seem all that significant compared to requiring a C++ compiler. -- Joel