On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Basile Starynkevitch > <bas...@starynkevitch.net> wrote: >> >> Sorry for such a stupid question, but assuming that the GCC trunk (e.g. svn >> rev 190745) >> did already switch (during my holidays, so I did not follow that) to C++ >> per http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-08/msg00165.html message, why are files >> under gcc/ still keeping a .c (not a .cc) extension >> (for example gcc/gimple-fold.c is not renamed to gcc/gimple-fold.cc), and >> why does >> gcc/Makefile.in still have more $(CC) than $(CXX)? > > Probably we should change the file names at some point, with some > large number of svn mv commands. It's not really a big deal though. > > In gcc/Makefile.in, most compilations are done using $(COMPILER). > That has been true for some time. I see hardly any instances of $(CC) > or $(CXX) in gcc/Makefile.in. > >> Or is the case that when building gcc the CC make variable >> is always a true C++ compiler (e.g. some g++)? > > No, $(CC) is still a C compiler. > >> Or do we have a rule than any file using C++ specific feature >> should be renamed from *.c to *.cc at the moment the C++ feature goes inside? > > We do not have such a rule and I would not recommend it. I think we > should rename all the files at once at some point.
If we do that then we should do the followup release without producing diffs (the way we do them does not "track renames"). OTOH I would consider never producing diffs for a new major release against the last branch release from the previous series anyway. Richard. > Ian
