On 09/03/2012 04:20 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Mon, 3 Sep 2012, Andrew Haley wrote: > >> This isn't the only way to proceed. I'd encourage someone wanting to >> do this to branch GCC and implement a rough cut of the feature. That > > That would very likely be "build one to throw away" - features built > without a clear definition of how they interact with other language > features have been particularly problematic in the past. So have > extensions built based on "take this feature from another language, and > put it in GNU C".
The alternative is worse: to design and fully specify a language feature and suggest that people adopt it without at any point trying that feature in real applications. >> will provide useful information about the amount of work likely to be >> needed to complete the task. Also, it will provide the opportunity to >> try out the language feature to see how well it works in practice. > > Whether people *will* use it is probably the more significant question > than whether it *can* be used to address particular issues. Well, of course. But the only way to find out is by an iterative process: design something, try it, and refine. Supporting that is one of GCC's primary goals, and has been since the beginning of the project. Andrew.
