tech-toolchain archive

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

Re: upgrading GCC 4.1 branch

On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 02:00:55PM -0500, der Mouse wrote:
 > >> What do we have that needs C++?
 > > In base?  groff is the biggest issue, because it's big and messy and
 > > sane people don't want to go near it.
 > :-)  Is there a publicly available spec for the *roff language?  I'd
 > like to have a look and at least consider building an implementation in
 > C.  (When I find my code in tones of trouble, / Friends and colleagues
 > come to me, / Speaking words of wisdom:  "Write in C".)

You're mad :-)

Also, if you're going to go to the trouble of writing a new
typesetting engine, can you please please please come up with a sane
frontend? I would much rather hand-convert every man page in base
using ed than breathe new life into roff.

 > > But realistically there are enough C++ things in pkgsrc that if
 > > there's no C++ compiler in base, there will always be one installed
 > > in /usr/pkg, which doesn't seem like much of an improvement.
 > It does to me.

Not if the objection is to license toxicity.

 > > Convincing the world to migrate onward from C++ is an option too, in
 > > the long run, but that requires first inventing a credible migration
 > > path.
 > Moving our C++ compiler to pkgsrc might provide a little incentive....

To do what? Design a suitable new language and write a compiler for
it, then try to convince the world it's better than C++? Probably not.

David A. Holland

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index