On 5/25/12, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > On May 25, 2012, at 10:50 AM, Lawrence Crowl wrote: > > Diego and I looked long and hard at this issue. It all came > > down to a sequence of problems. First, libstdc++ isn't rigged > > for GTY, > > If portability to other C++ compilers wasn't a concern, we could > extend out g++ to make supporting GTY better, so that we can > simplify and refine the GTY stuff.
Personally, I would rather see if we can take advantage of C++ features to reduce garbage and then use the Boehm collector. There is too much manual management with GTY, and I'd rather the compiler leverage mainstream practice rather than depart from it. > I fear we need some light weight reflection, might make a nice > language feature for a future C++ standard, if done well. There has been some talk of such a language feature. As yet, the only concrete proposal does not have wide support. I suspect it will take several more proposals before we hit upon one that will get wide support. If you have any good ideas, now would be a really excellent time to speak up! -- Lawrence Crowl
