From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25335 invoked by alias); 1 Aug 2008 13:13:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 25326 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Aug 2008 13:13:35 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Aug 2008 13:13:14 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D78069839A; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 13:13:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FF8A98397; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 13:13:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KOuRU-0003x6-3A; Fri, 01 Aug 2008 09:13:12 -0400 Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 13:13:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Vladimir Prus , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Move GDB to C++ ? Message-ID: <20080801131312.GA14712@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , Vladimir Prus , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <487658F7.1090508@earthlink.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2008-08/txt/msg00004.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 09:42:28PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Vladimir Prus > > Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:10:37 +0400 > > > > I think this discussion went a bit wrong way -- trying to convince folks that > > *investing effort* in converting to C++ is justified. However, I don't think > > the proposal is about making folks not interested in C++ doing any work -- the > > proposal is about allowing folks who do some specific work, and want to make > > use of additional features C++ provides, to use those features, while not imposing > > significant problems on the rest of contributors. > > Your being busy refactoring does impose a significant problem on me. > We are members of the same team, so how you use your time while on the > team is important to me. Could you please expand on this idea? Certainly the event of refactoring will have a big impact on all contributors. That's at the moment of commit, and not before. So if you think it's actively harmful, that's a different issue from the one Vladimir is talking about here. GDB is a GNU project, driven by volunteers and sponsored contributors. And the sponsored contributors are volunteers from the perspective of anyone outside the sponsoring organization. I don't understand the objection to other people choosing to invest effort on something, even if you think it's unimportant. Volunteer projects go where their volunteers want to take them! And I think one of the bit structural issues in GDB is that it's hard for even active volunteers to take it to new places. I want to make that easier. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery