From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 57694 invoked by alias); 1 Sep 2016 18:22:56 -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 56460 invoked by uid 89); 1 Sep 2016 18:22:55 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=guidelines, biggest, marchi, Marchi X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 18:22:45 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 662176331E; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:22:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u81IMgpr030023; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:22:43 -0400 Subject: Re: Go C++ only To: Simon Marchi References: <212bc30a-e6ad-886b-0881-8206dd91b933@redhat.com> <410fa84696e520ca3845c841fc7391b8@simark.ca> Cc: gdb@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <5479c5a0-a346-1718-5573-eeb4b19bc9db@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 18:22:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <410fa84696e520ca3845c841fc7391b8@simark.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-09/txt/msg00007.txt.bz2 On 09/01/2016 07:07 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > Are there some guidelines about which C++ features we can use or not? I think the biggest guideline so far is that people still want to build gdb on systems with compilers that predate C++11, so we're stuck with C++03 for the moment. > Perhaps some precisions about the coding style, for C++-specific > constructs (e.g. initializer lists). List initialization is C++11, so it's out, at least for now. > I suppose we'll end up copying > what GCC does for the most part, but it should be clear. Right, the proposal is to follow GCC's conventions: https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/cxx-conversion#Coding_conventions Naturally we'll need to update the coding standards pages to mention C++ and point at that: https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/Internals%20Coding-Standards Thanks, Pedro Alves