This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 0/6] [C++] Drop -fpermissive hack, enable -Werror
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Simon Marchi <simon dot marchi at ericsson dot com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:21:14 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] [C++] Drop -fpermissive hack, enable -Werror
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1447864802-24016-1-git-send-email-palves at redhat dot com> <564CB8EC dot 5000203 at gmail dot com> <564CBB15 dot 7020209 at redhat dot com> <867fle1b5z dot fsf at gmail dot com> <564DE744 dot 8030104 at redhat dot com> <86lh9types dot fsf at gmail dot com>
On 11/20/2015 09:46 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> Pedro Alves <email@example.com> writes:
>> Yeah, my plan here was to "lock" (*) ports to C++ mode one by one, as soon
>> as they build in C++ mode. Actually, I think a negative/reverse list is even
>> better. This allows keeping track of ports/hosts people really still care
>> about, and, gives us an easy defined stopping point (when the list is clear).
>> What would you think of this approach?
> Yes, this approach is OK to me. However, as you said, we need to
> announce this on gdb@ first. Before we build GDB in C++ mode for some
> hosts, we need to test it. IIRC, we didn't test GDB built in C++
On my machine (x86_64 Fedora 20), C++ mode has no regressions compared to C mode.
If C++ is flipped to on by default on (e.g.) x86_64 GNU/Linux, then the x86_64 GNU/Linux
buildbot builders will automatically start testing in C++ mode too. If we do this,
then the Fedora builder (Fedora-x86_64-cxx-build-m64) that is specifically building
with --enable-build-with-cxx should be flipped to build with --enable-build-with-cxx=no,
to catch C mode regressions, for as long as we support C mode.
> Another thing in my mind is the release schedule. We have two months,
> but people are off around Christmas and New Year. Do we want GDB 8.0
> built in C++ in default in some hosts, such as linux? I am not sure.
Can't see why not. But we can always flip back to C for the release.
>> I should probably move this to a separate thread, push this to a branch on
>> sourceware.org (to collect a better initial set of still-needs-conversion-work
>> hosts, with community help) and announce the intent on the gdb@ list, for
>> wider visibility/discussion.
> Yes, let's do that.
OK, I'll try to find some time to do it.
>> + # The "doesn't support C++ yet" hall of shame.
>> + case $host in
>> + *-*aix* | \
>> + *-*go32* | \
>> + *-*darwin* | \
>> + *-*solaris* | \
>> + *-*nto* | \
>> + *-*bsd* | \
>> + xtensa*-*-linux* | \
> Why do we especially exclude xtensa*-*-linux* from building in C++ mode?
Just because that one I know for sure doesn't build in C++ mode
yet -- I have a patch from Simon in my github C++ branch that fixes
gdb/xtensa-linux-nat.c in C++ mode, which is not upstream yet.