From: Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com>
Cc: gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: GDB in C++
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 12:14:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <468A3DA6.2010806@adacore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.1.20070703084716.01a5eec0@localhost>
To me, in this discussion, what is missing is a recognition
that this discussion has been carried out before. In order
to make a change here, it is not sufficient just to recycle
the old familiar arguments. What is needed is to make a case
that for some reason, the situation has changed, and so the
decision made previously to avoid switching to C++ should be
revisited. If all the proponents can do is to reargue the
general case, repeating what has been said before, I don't
see any basis for changing the previous decision.
My own view is that there may be some gain if the resulting
style was well policed, but there is a major negative in
making the transition, really three negatives:
1. A lot of effort is expended in the transition
2. The transition is bound to cause some instabilities
3. There may be people who just are not comfortable with
the language change, and will not contribute as effectively
or at all. Of course there may be others who are more
inclined to contribute, but this factor needs analysis.
What is needed is an argument that the advantages outweigh
the disadvantages. Arguments based solely on the value of
the resulting style improvements are inadequate for me
unless framed in these terms.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-03 12:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-30 14:56 Michael Eager
2007-07-01 20:54 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-07-02 1:33 ` Joel Brobecker
2007-07-03 3:49 ` Michael Eager
2007-07-03 7:55 ` Mark Kettenis
2007-07-11 21:04 ` Jan Kratochvil
2007-07-02 7:21 ` Mark Kettenis
2007-07-03 3:57 ` Michael Eager
2007-07-03 7:03 ` Fabian Cenedese
2007-07-03 12:14 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
2007-07-03 19:09 ` Gary Funck
2007-07-11 19:47 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2007-07-11 19:59 ` Paul Koning
2007-07-11 20:41 ` Jim Blandy
2007-07-11 21:00 ` Gary Funck
2007-07-11 21:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-07-11 21:38 ` Robert Dewar
2007-07-12 3:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-07-12 2:24 ` Michael Eager
2007-07-13 20:21 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2007-07-13 20:55 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-07-13 21:24 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2007-07-12 3:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-07-11 21:11 ` Gary Funck
2007-07-02 20:21 ` David Daney
2007-07-02 20:28 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=468A3DA6.2010806@adacore.com \
--to=dewar@adacore.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox