lmi
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lmi] [lmi-commits] master d0ece2a 3/5: Exercise CC as well as CXX


From: Vadim Zeitlin
Subject: Re: [lmi] [lmi-commits] master d0ece2a 3/5: Exercise CC as well as CXX
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:46:16 +0200

On Thu, 21 Jun 2018 18:35:41 -0400 (EDT) Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:

GC> branch: master
GC> commit d0ece2a38dda00f06ce7067d5a05d174e6905500
GC> Author: Gregory W. Chicares <address@hidden>
GC> Commit: Gregory W. Chicares <address@hidden>
GC> 
GC>     Exercise CC as well as CXX
GC>     
GC>     Motivation: Additional gcc warnings will soon be enabled. It seems
GC>     desirable to maintain distinct lists for gcc, g++, and both. In the
GC>     future, lmi might use C files, as it did in the past, but no longer
GC>     does until this commit

 Personally, I think using only one language in a project is preferable,
unless there is a really good reason to use more than one and I don't see
why would lmi want to reintroduce C source files. The only reason given
here:

GC>     And it may be more efficient to compile glibc code as C.

doesn't really seem very convincing to me because I think that compiling
this code using either C or C++ compiler is a tiny part of the total build
time in any case. And it just doesn't seem right to have to wonder whether
a new function should be written to C, to make it compile faster, or C++,
for all the other reasons.

 IMHO we should stick to C++ everywhere for consistency and simplicity.
VZ


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]