From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2933 invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2015 13:14:59 -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 2913 invoked by uid 89); 12 Feb 2015 13:14:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:14:58 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t1CDEsic030851 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 12 Feb 2015 08:14:54 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t1CDEqS8008310; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 08:14:53 -0500 Message-ID: <54DCA74C.3000208@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:14:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/36] C++ keyword cleanliness, mostly auto-generated References: <1423524046-20605-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <1423524046-20605-4-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <20150211075749.GJ4738@adacore.com> <54DB2E8D.9000103@redhat.com> <54DB3416.1010404@redhat.com> <20150212121910.GL4738@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20150212121910.GL4738@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg00322.txt.bz2 On 02/12/2015 12:19 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> On 02/11/2015 10:27 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> >>> Below's the patch that I plan on folding in. Builds in C and C++ modes. >>> Regtesting in progress. >> >> Regtesting successful. Here's the current version of the patch. > > Thanks a lot, Pedro, this is great. Great, thanks. > > I haven't had a chance to review all the patches, and I will admit > that I winced a little when seeing some of them (but accepted them), Not sure whether I want to ask which. :-) > but overall, I'm very impressed to see progress in this area. Thanks. > > Two comments: > > 1. I personally am not ready for a full switch to C++ ;-) > I know it's not what this patch does, but just sayin' :-). > Will work on it, though, but if you had some ideas of how soon > you'd like to do the switch, that might help me plan better. I don't have target dates in mind. :-) There's still work to do. Before we start using C++ features, and thus stop supporting building GDB as a C program, I think we should have a period where we'll switch to C++ by default, while still leaving the C mode option available as fallback. Only when we're sure all supported hosts / configurations build and work correctly, can we drop the C mode and start using C++ features. For fully converting to be a valid C++ program, we need to get rid of the -fpermissive shortcut. E.g., 'char *s = xmalloc (size);' needs a cast in C++, but -fpermissive downgrades that to a warning. There's another similarly sized series on my github to address that, but it needs cleaning up and possibly redoing parts. I can't tell when I'll be able to get to it. It may take several weeks to land all that in mainline, unless I manage to recruit help (hint!, hint!). There's also the "we shouldn't throw from signal handlers" issue I mentioned in the reply to Yao, which has nobody working on yet, afaik. > 2. This is a fairly massive patch series, and in the interest > of not making it inhuman for you to maintain it, I would be > perfectly fine with a fairly quick process towards getting > those patches pushed. Apart from the last few ones dealing > with TRY_CATCH, it's fairly simple patches. Thanks, that'd be great. Thanks, Pedro Alves