From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8053 invoked by alias); 20 Oct 2016 18:24:17 -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 8041 invoked by uid 89); 20 Oct 2016 18:24:16 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RED autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=exposure, Hx-languages-length:1511, burden, Hx-spam-relays-external:10.0.90.82 X-HELO: gproxy5-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com Received: from gproxy5-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (HELO gproxy5-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com) (67.222.38.55) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with SMTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 18:24:06 +0000 Received: (qmail 23859 invoked by uid 0); 20 Oct 2016 18:24:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO CMOut01) (10.0.90.82) by gproxy5.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 20 Oct 2016 18:24:04 -0000 Received: from box522.bluehost.com ([74.220.219.122]) by CMOut01 with id xuPz1t01G2f2jeq01uQ29N; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 12:24:03 -0600 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=beT4Do/B c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=GsOEXm/OWkKvwdLVJsfwcA==:117 a=GsOEXm/OWkKvwdLVJsfwcA==:17 a=L9H7d07YOLsA:10 a=9cW_t1CCXrUA:10 a=s5jvgZ67dGcA:10 a=CH0kA5CcgfcA:10 a=lzDhS8hmAAAA:8 a=tXL9peQP92kbvSH2XecA:9 a=rigQk1bY_8VmChEzA3fK:22 Received: from 174-16-143-211.hlrn.qwest.net ([174.16.143.211]:52434 helo=pokyo) by box522.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.86_1) (envelope-from ) id 1bxI0X-0005kO-A1; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 12:24:01 -0600 From: Tom Tromey To: Luis Machado Cc: Pedro Alves , GDB Patches Subject: Re: C++11 (abridged version) In-Reply-To: (Luis Machado's message of "Thu, 20 Oct 2016 13:10:26 -0500") References: <4300d24a-8711-c5de-79ce-7c530162288c@redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 18:24:00 -0000 Message-ID: <87eg3azxog.fsf@tromey.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BWhitelist: no X-Exim-ID: 1bxI0X-0005kO-A1 X-Source-Sender: 174-16-143-211.hlrn.qwest.net (pokyo) [174.16.143.211]:52434 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 3 X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTIyLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ== X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00610.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Luis" == Luis Machado writes: Luis> It would be great if people manifesting their opinions offlist would Luis> do so through the list. After all, this is an upstream project and Luis> opinions from everyone are appreciated. Otherwise it feels like you Luis> are making this decision based on your own opinion of the matter. We Luis> never saw any of the several people that got in touch with you Luis> directly. :-) I try to limit my exposure to the list. C++11 is a major improvement. There are already existing patches that it simplifies. So I am in favor it; however I think a valid reason to defer the transition would be if there is an active user base for whom it would be unduly difficult to upgrade. There are some weasel words in there because I think some judgment must be involved. Luis> As long as we have a sane codebase that makes contributions easier for Luis> everyone (instead of getting in the way with cryptic smarts and Luis> trickery simply to reduce code size), it should be good. Compilers are Luis> doing a better job these days anyway, and making code as compact as Luis> possible, though pleasing in some nerdy way, may not yield real Luis> benefit in the end. It may actually be harder to follow. I think the cases in question aren't of the form "shorter code is more pleasing" but of the form "move the maintenance burden to the C++ library". The former is aesthetic, but the latter means less work locally. Tom