On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Robert Dewar <de...@adacore.com> wrote: > 徐持恒 wrote: > >> I have FUD on the use of "advanced" C++ features like template(even >> standard template), namespace, exceptions. This is partly because my >> favorite source code analyzer can not handle them properly. I have >> tried to use my favorite source code analyzer to analyze LLVM source >> code, which use C++ standard template aggressively, the result is not >> ideal . I also have tried to use it to analyze Open64 source code, >> which does not use template, the result is much better .It would be >> nice if there are another template-free encapsulation over standard >> template. For example, an template-free container encapsulating >> standard container template. > > It's a pity to exclude namespaces, the advantage of breaking the > single-big-namespace model are evident.
I agree. I would not exclude namespaces. What I would add is a required "explicit" on all single-argument constructors. We want all conversions to be explicitly specified. Do we have a warning for this we can use? I would like to be able to use function overloading. For the start we'd want to use -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti for stage2 and stage3. Oh - and we didn't yet decide to switch to C++ as implementation language. Did we? Thanks, Richard.
