On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:17 PM, Toon Moene <t...@moene.org> wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 05:41 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Toon Moene<t...@moene.org> wrote:
>
>>> On 05/17/2011 08:32 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu {, m32} with --enable-build-with-cxx.
>>>> Committed to mainline SVN as obvious.
>>>
>>> Does that mean that I can now remove the --disable-werror from my daily
>>> C++
>>> bootstrap run ?
>
> Well, that certainly worked, as exemplified by this:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-05/msg01890.html
>
> At least that would enable my daily run (between 18:10 and 20:10 UTC) to
> catch -Werror mistakes ...
>
>>> It's great that some people understand the intricacies of the
>>> infight^H^H^H^H^H^H differences between the C and C++ type model.
>>>
>>> OK: 1/2 :-)
>>
>> I suspect this infight would vanish if we just switched, as we discussed
>> in the past.
>
> Perhaps it would just help if we implemented the next step of the plan
> (http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/gcc-in-cxx):
>
> # "it would be a good thing to try forcing the C++ host compiler requirement
> for GCC 4.[7] with just building stage1 with C++ and stage2/3 with the
> stage1 C compiler. --disable-build-with-cxx would be a workaround for a
> missing C++ host compiler."
Or the other way around, build stage1 with the host C compiler, add
C++ to stage1-languages and build stage2/3 with the stageN C++ compiler.
That avoids the host C++ compiler requirement for now and excercises
the libstdc++ linking issues.
But yes, somebody has to go forward to implement either (or both) variants.
Not that I'm too excited to see GCC built with a C++ compiler (or even C++
features being used).
Richard.
