On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Richard Guenther <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis > <g...@integrable-solutions.net> wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:13 PM, David Edelsohn <dje....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> We would like to start the process to make GCC 4.8 build in C++ mode by >>>> default. >>>> >>>> The mechanics of the change are simple enough. I volunteer to test >>>> changing >>>> the default on all primary targets (assuming I can get them from the GCC >>>> build farm). >>> >>> I appreciate the motivation, but this may cause major problems on >>> non-GNU/Linux platforms. Testing on all primary targets is not >>> enough. >>> >>> Do you expect GCC to be able to bootstrap starting from a vendor C++ >>> compiler or will this require G++? >> >> I would expect that we use C++03, and any C++ compiler. > > Yes. Thus, for stage1 we should force -std=c++03 -pedantic if we > build with GCC to > avoid creep in of GNU features.
Fully agreed. > Btw, I think we should only start forcing C++ when 1) there is a > branch/patch out > that shows benefit from using C++. I previously mentioned that I'd like to > see > 2) a patch that _properly_ wraps a C++ class for consumption by our garbage > collector (thus, not a hack that works for a specific case but infrastructure > that we think will work for _all_ cases, including libstdc++ container use). I was actually thinking starting with abstractions that do not interact directly with the memory manager, because I would like us to get our feet wet before doing the full plunge. Such a work would be confined to a part of the compiler (say the C++ front-end). Any particular reason you would like to start with the garbage collector which touches just about anything? -- Gaby
