From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16233 invoked by alias); 16 Jul 2008 19:06:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 16223 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jul 2008 19:06:40 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from igw1.br.ibm.com (HELO igw1.br.ibm.com) (32.104.18.24) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 19:06:18 +0000 Received: from mailhub3.br.ibm.com (mailhub3 [9.18.232.110]) by igw1.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 206BA32C23D for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:38:45 -0300 (BRT) Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (d24av02.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.47]) by mailhub3.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m6GJ5tNj2961654 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:06:01 -0300 Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m6GJ5ogt017482 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:05:50 -0300 Received: from [9.8.0.168] ([9.8.0.168]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m6GJ5nQc014988; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:05:50 -0300 Subject: Re: Move GDB to C++ ? From: Thiago Jung Bauermann To: Vladimir Prus Cc: Robert Dewar , gdb@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <200807142152.29924.vladimir@codesourcery.com> References: <487658F7.1090508@earthlink.net> <200807142023.04952.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <487B8139.9030803@adacore.com> <200807142152.29924.vladimir@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 19:06:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1216235099.12209.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.2 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: 2008-07/txt/msg00195.txt.bz2 On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 21:52 +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote: > On Monday 14 July 2008 20:39:21 Robert Dewar wrote: > > > The problem is the book named "The C++ Programming Language" went through at > > > least 3 revisions, presumably with extra help of professional editors. Do we want > > > to beat that? And why newcomers who already read this book should read the > > > documentation for our non-standard mechanisms. > > > > Well I don't know the code well enough, but what exactly do you mean > > by non-standard here---not conforming to the C standard??? > > I mean a high-level design patterns and constructs that closely correspond > to existing constructs of C++, but yet implemented in a home-grown way, > and unknown to either C++ programmers or C programmers outside GDB. I wholeheartedly agree with Vladimir's points. The cost of keeping GDB source as it is should be weighted in as well. FWIW, I've been hacking in GDB for the past year and a half, and just a couple weeks ago I started to understand the cleanup mechanism and use it in my code. I also still don't understand how the exceptions mechanism work (I always trust the TRY_CATCH and EXCEPT macros will do the necessary magic for me), and somebody even told me that it doesn't work well, in reality. > > The GDB code > > I *have* looked at all seems like fairly standard C to me! > > Tom has posted a list of such things in GDB, did you look at that list? Indeed, that's a very good list. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann Software Engineer IBM Linux Technology Center