On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Dirk Jagdmann wrote:
>>> To me the biggest advantage of transitioning to a C++ compiler is the
>>> availability of std::string and std::list, std::set, std
Evan Huus wrote:
If we do plan to migrate we will definitely be using only C-style
constructs to start. It will be enough work transitioning compilers
without changing language constructs at the same time.
I've created a patch which implements one small part of this and have
attached it to ht
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Gerald Combs wrote:
> On 2/12/13 1:17 PM, Jaap Keuter wrote:
>> On 02/11/2013 06:36 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
>>> Moving just to a C++ compiler shouldn't cause problems for anybody.
>>> While C++ isn't technically a superset of C, it is trivial for C
>>> programmers to
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Jaap Keuter wrote:
> On 02/12/2013 10:53 PM, Gerald Combs wrote:
>> On 2/12/13 1:17 PM, Jaap Keuter wrote:
>>> On 02/11/2013 06:36 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
Moving just to a C++ compiler shouldn't cause problems for anybody.
While C++ isn't technically a super
On 02/12/2013 10:53 PM, Gerald Combs wrote:
> On 2/12/13 1:17 PM, Jaap Keuter wrote:
>> On 02/11/2013 06:36 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
>>> Moving just to a C++ compiler shouldn't cause problems for anybody.
>>> While C++ isn't technically a superset of C, it is trivial for C
>>> programmers to avoid the
On 2/12/13 1:17 PM, Jaap Keuter wrote:
> On 02/11/2013 06:36 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
>> Moving just to a C++ compiler shouldn't cause problems for anybody.
>> While C++ isn't technically a superset of C, it is trivial for C
>> programmers to avoid the few areas of incompatibility (as far as I
>> know
On 02/11/2013 06:36 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
> Moving just to a C++ compiler shouldn't cause problems for anybody.
> While C++ isn't technically a superset of C, it is trivial for C
> programmers to avoid the few areas of incompatibility (as far as I
> know there are simply a few more reserved words li
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Dirk Jagdmann wrote:
>>> To me the biggest advantage of transitioning to a C++ compiler is the
>>> availability of std::string and std::list, std::set, std
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Dirk Jagdmann wrote:
>> To me the biggest advantage of transitioning to a C++ compiler is the
>> availability of std::string and std::list, std::set, std::map. They are so
>> much
>> more convinient to use tha
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Ed Beroset wrote:
> Evan Huus wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Guy Harris
>> wrote:
>
>
>>> Note all the lines flagged with "[-Wc++-compat]"; those are for
>>> code that's valid C but not valid C++ and that would have to be
>>> fixed in order to compi
Evan Huus wrote:
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Guy Harris
wrote:
Note all the lines flagged with "[-Wc++-compat]"; those are for
code that's valid C but not valid C++ and that would have to be
fixed in order to compile with a C++ compiler (unless there's a
"let valid C code that *could* be
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Guy Harris wrote:
>
> On Feb 11, 2013, at 8:01 AM, Dirk Jagdmann wrote:
>
>> To me the biggest advantage of transitioning to a C++ compiler is the
>> availability of std::string and std::list, std::set, std::map. They are so
>> much
>> more convinient to use than
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:36:52PM -0500, Evan Huus wrote:
> Moving just to a C++ compiler shouldn't cause problems for anybody.
> While C++ isn't technically a superset of C, it is trivial for C
> programmers to avoid the few areas of incompatibility (as far as I
> know there are simply a few more
On Feb 11, 2013, at 8:01 AM, Dirk Jagdmann wrote:
> To me the biggest advantage of transitioning to a C++ compiler is the
> availability of std::string and std::list, std::set, std::map. They are so
> much
> more convinient to use than equivalents from the glib or the alternatives
> designed fo
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Richard Stearn
wrote:
> A thought from the sidelines. I have contributed to Wireshark, once.
> I probably will not contribute again (unless I find another protocol
> itch to scratch). This is an observation from scratching that itch.
>
> Creating suite of dissec
A thought from the sidelines. I have contributed to Wireshark, once.
I probably will not contribute again (unless I find another protocol
itch to scratch). This is an observation from scratching that itch.
Creating suite of dissectors from the skeletons in the development
guide was not difficul
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Dirk Jagdmann wrote:
> To me the biggest advantage of transitioning to a C++ compiler is the
> availability of std::string and std::list, std::set, std::map. They are so
> much
> more convinient to use than equivalents from the glib or the alternatives
> designed
To me the biggest advantage of transitioning to a C++ compiler is the
availability of std::string and std::list, std::set, std::map. They are so much
more convinient to use than equivalents from the glib or the alternatives
designed for Wireshark. Since the C++ STL classes allow a custom allocator
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Ed Beroset wrote:
> Donald White wrote:
>>
>> That said, I have some experience with C to C++ transitions. Twice in
>> my career, the team I was with was given the job of maintaining legacy
>> products written in C (several 100K lines of code) to maintain and
>> e
Donald White wrote:
That said, I have some experience with C to C++ transitions. Twice in
my career, the team I was with was given the job of maintaining legacy
products written in C (several 100K lines of code) to maintain and
enhance. In both cases, our first step was to recompile with a C++
I am not sure about starting to make use of C++ features, but what I do find
useful is maintaining a g++ build for a fairly large codebase I maintain. I
have never even tried to run the resulting binary, but it catches certain
errors that the C compiler does not. The most useful one is that C++
On 2/9/2013 3:24 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Guy Harris wrote:
(Subject line changed to match what you presumably intended.)
Yes, thank you.
On Feb 9, 2013, at 6:41 AM, Evan Huus wrote:
This just occurred to me as I was reading an article on GCC (which has
recently
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Guy Harris wrote:
>
> (Subject line changed to match what you presumably intended.)
Yes, thank you.
> On Feb 9, 2013, at 6:41 AM, Evan Huus wrote:
>> This just occurred to me as I was reading an article on GCC (which has
>> recently migrated to using a C++ compil
(Subject line changed to match what you presumably intended.)
On Feb 9, 2013, at 6:41 AM, Evan Huus wrote:
> This just occurred to me as I was reading an article on GCC (which has
> recently migrated to using a C++ compiler, despite still being mostly
> written in C). I haven't given it a great
24 matches
Mail list logo
