From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31485 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2020 13:20:12 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 31465 invoked by uid 89); 24 Jan 2020 13:20:12 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*f:sk:f9e166e, H*MI:sk:f9e166e, H*i:sk:f9e166e, HTo:U*nickc X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 13:20:10 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 757F111708B; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 08:20:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id oPjN56x0VNzE; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 08:20:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10D3F117087; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 08:20:09 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4DB0982CEE; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 17:20:04 +0400 (+04) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 13:20:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Nick Clifton Cc: Christian Biesinger , binutils@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Allow C99/C11 in bfd? Message-ID: <20200124132004.GA7409@adacore.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-SW-Source: 2020-01/txt/msg00057.txt.bz2 > > (I'm not even going to ask about C++, although I think that would be nice) > > Bah! Real programmers don't use C++! Just joking of course, > but I seriously doubt that we will want to change the code base > now. Speaking personally I am much more comfortable with C > than with C++, but that is probably just me. The way the Pro C++ members of the GDB community approached the suggestion was by building a case of what C++ would bring, concretely, in terms of improvement. They also had a transition plan. As someone who was _not_ in favor of the switch to C++, I had to admit that the C++ proponents had some solid points and that those against did not have a solid counter-argument. It took a while, as a decision of this magnitude always takes, but it helped us keep the discussions focused on factual technical arguments. I thought that worked really way for the GDB group. Assuming the community is not refusing to even hear about the idea, how things happened in GDB could be inspiration for how to at least debate the merits of the change. Note that the idea might be dead right off the bat if being usable from C is an objective of the binutils project. For a relatively low-level library like this one, I wouldn't personally be surprised. -- Joel