[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Tinycc-devel] the most useless question on this list about basic c+

From: Thomas Preud'homme
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] the most useless question on this list about basic c++ extensions
Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 12:01:41 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.32-5-686; KDE/4.4.3; i686; ; )

On Monday 10 May 2010 10:40:21 mobi phil wrote:
> > On Saturday 08 May 2010 17:05:32 mobi phil wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >> 
> step by step, isn't it?
> for from me to define your schedule :), but in my opinion, the
> following would be the priority list:
> 1. class + inheritance
> 2. template
> 3. operators
> 4. exceptions
> 5. lambda !! :)

The thing is I'm not planning to implement unwind stuffs for C++ support but 
for -static to work. As someone else replied, C++ is not planned at the 
> I think exceptions are not the the most important things, as they can
> be simulated with macros. (well you need sthg like endtry macro after
> the exceptions). Based on my experience templates are of higher added
> value, than operators. Calling convention: would not work with what is
> already there? It is not strictly necessary, at least at the begining
> to be binary compatible with libraries, etc. or?
Of course it is, how would you link to libstdc++ if you aren't compatible ?
> rgrds,
> mobi phil
> being mobile, but including technology
> http://mobiphil.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

reply via email to

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