send them back.
Hoping to help gcc become even better.
--
Respect,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Shiv Shankar Dayal
wrote:
> So, instead of a stack and a heap, you now have a stack and "something that
> looks
> exactly like a heap but we'll call it a stacky-thing" which will be used for
> all
> the
> allocations that would h
> You are absolutely free to define heapless as helpless.
>
Not quite helpless. Though less of help is there. People have
offered their personal help.
--
Best regards,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
body, either
> join them or have someone champion your ideas there.
>
I am not going to a commitee which releases specification after 12-13 years.
When those will be incorporated in compilers. I am better off doing it myself.
LOL. :) Thanks for advice though.
--
Best regards,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
lity of this as too many
things will break down. I myself was not sure what cna be done with
the idea but now I understand that it has to be a new language. It cannot
be a plugin or dialect even for there are more things in my mind which
came last night.
--
Best regards,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
de backward-compatible.
Far too many things will break. Thanks Charles for at least not calling
it hopeless. :)
I have firm belief that it can be done though it is a Herculean task. I will
try to borrow as much syntax/features as much possible from C/C++.
--
Best regards,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
.
>
> There are good reasons why dynamic memory, which has unpredictable
> lifetime, is kept in a separate region from stack memory, which
> doesn't.
>
> I agree the proposal is hopeless.
>
To add more, I am trying to enforce RAII. You are not allowed to do memory
allocation at any place other than construction and deallocate it other than
destructor. Hope you get the point.
--
Best regards,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 8 October 2011 10:48, Shiv Shankar Dayal wrote:
>>> It sounds like all you're proposing is using the stack for dynamic
>>> allocation instead of the heap, then adding a compacting garbage
>>> collector
Why I want a new language is that whole compatibility goes for a toss.
It would become very difficult for user to discriminate when to allocate
on heap and when to use stack while using existing libraries. Hence,
I did not want to do a gcc plugin.
--
Best regards,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
s true that I want to use stack for dynamic memory allocation
but I do not want a garbage collector. Garbage collection should happen
though RAII.
--
Best regards,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
Hi,
I am sorry. I just hit reply.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Shiv Shankar Dayal
Date: Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: Heapless C/C++
To: foxmuldrs...@yahoo.com
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Rick Hodgin wrote:
>
> Shiv,
>
> You have a
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>> What is heapless C++?
>
> Hopeless
>
> (sorry couldn't resist ;)
>
> Paolo
>
Why?
--
Best regards,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
specification. The C language can be used unaltered except heap
allocation part. I would prefer something
like Java that we have a bytecode format and core must be small.
Around this core we can write bigger
functionalities.
Please share your thoughts.
--
Best regards,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
13 matches
Mail list logo
