On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 01:06:59PM -0500, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 02/03/12 12:56 , Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
>
> >Since no other GCC part is using C++ currently, I believe this would
> >be rather poor first module choice to convert to C++. If C++ was
> >already a non-optional requirement, then C++ conversion would be OK,
>
> It already is. We bootstrap in C++ mode. I don't see a problem
> starting to move some code to C++. Whether this is a good chunk of
> code to convert is another question.
We don't, we are only using C++ for stage2 and stage3 compilation by
default, not for stage1, so you can still bootstrap without C++ compiler.
And --disable-build-poststage1-with-cxx works just fine too.
I think it would be a bad idea if it was gengtype that started requiring
C++, if it is for something useful, perhaps (though you know my position on
it).
Jakub
