On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 13:04 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
[...]
> I don't know whether C++ is intrinsic to GOLD's linking superiority.
> The reason I cited the GOLD project is because of the programming
> style of the GOLD source code. A quote from
> http://lwn.net/Articles/274859/, about the GOLD source code:
>
> I looked through the gold sources a bit. I wish everything in the GNU
> toolchain were written this way. It is very clean code, nicely
> commented, and easy to follow. It shows pretty clearly, I think, the
> ways in which C++ can be better than C when it is used well.
If "GOLD" is as old and flexible (and portable?) as binutils, gcc and/or
other huge software maintained to death, it is probably similar complex
and odd.
If people take a > 10 year old tool and rewrite it from scratch, I would
assume that design is better.
And I can't see any direct dependence on the used programming
language(s) if one compares running code and what is left of "design"
after years of design extensions, changes, enhancements, etc. to a new
design from scratch from the lessons learned (hopefully) from the former
one.
Bernd
--
Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
Embedded Linux Development and Services
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
