On Wednesday 11 of April 2012 11:43:36 Richard Guenther wrote: > > () The overloadable operator new means that memory can be > > _implicitly_ allocated in the right place. > > Implicit allocation is bad. In a compiler you want to _see_ where you > spend memory.
in c++ you can overload new/delete operators for each class and track all these allocations with provided allocator. please consider following example: http://pastebin.com/UmBGWMTH you can bind polls, gc or anything else you want for any class and just use the new/delete keywords in sources as usual. in pure C you need to call the right malloc_*/free_* variants for each class. > > () Class hierarchies also mean that programmers can distinguish > > in the pointer types that a function needs a decl parameter, > > without having to say 'all trees' versus 'a very specific tree'. > > The static type checking avoids run-time bugs. > > True. In a very limited set of cases. C++ is not powerful enough > to express pointer-to-everything-that-would-be-considered-a-gimple-val. > Maybe C++ is not the right choice after all? (I suppose C++ concepts > would have helped here? pointer-to-tree-that-fulfils-is_gimple_val ... > (though is_gimple_val is not be a static property). hmm :) the c# provides a nice constraints engine (google the 'where' keyword) and the so-called duck-typing (c# 4.0) which might simplfy the source code that operates on ast nodes.
