From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-32414-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 19740 invoked by alias); 11 Jul 2008 16:09:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 19731 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jul 2008 16:09:01 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.artimi.com (HELO mail.artimi.com) (194.72.81.2)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:08:41 +0000
Received: from ALBATROSS ([192.168.8.39]) by mail.artimi.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 	 Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:08:39 +0100
From: "Dave Korn" <dave.korn@artimi.com>
To: "'Joel Brobecker'" <brobecker@adacore.com>, 	"'Mark Kettenis'" <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
Cc: <stanshebs@earthlink.net>, 	<gdb@sourceware.org>
References: <487658F7.1090508@earthlink.net> <200807101901.m6AJ1UMQ007185@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <48766A88.1050402@earthlink.net> <200807102153.m6ALrjjm017722@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20080711062612.GB6132@adacore.com>
Subject: RE: Move GDB to C++ ?
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:09:00 -0000
Message-ID: <003001c8e370$61fcaa10$2708a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <20080711062612.GB6132@adacore.com>
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-07/txt/msg00128.txt.bz2

Joel Brobecker wrote on 11 July 2008 07:26:

> (I agree with Tom: Very Brave :)
> 
>> The subset of C++ that I like is pretty much that what is called C.  I
>> don't think the benefits of using a few C++ outweighs the loss of the
>> ability to compile GDB with a bog standard C compiler.
> 
> That would be my concern #1. I really think that it's a huge plus
> to be able to build GDB with a C compiler. C++ compiler are just
> not as common as C compilers, particularly on more exotic platforms.
 
  Then again, how many such platforms even run C compilers, as opposed to
being entirely cross-targeted?

  I think the real issue is that GDB has to be able to debug itself and GDB
is currently weak in a few important areas of C++ support.  I think that
should be resolved before we consider porting the code.

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....