On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 13:04 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: [...] > I don't know whether C++ is intrinsic to GOLD's linking superiority. > The reason I cited the GOLD project is because of the programming > style of the GOLD source code. A quote from > http://lwn.net/Articles/274859/, about the GOLD source code: > > I looked through the gold sources a bit. I wish everything in the GNU > toolchain were written this way. It is very clean code, nicely > commented, and easy to follow. It shows pretty clearly, I think, the > ways in which C++ can be better than C when it is used well. If "GOLD" is as old and flexible (and portable?) as binutils, gcc and/or other huge software maintained to death, it is probably similar complex and odd. If people take a > 10 year old tool and rewrite it from scratch, I would assume that design is better. And I can't see any direct dependence on the used programming language(s) if one compares running code and what is left of "design" after years of design extensions, changes, enhancements, etc. to a new design from scratch from the lessons learned (hopefully) from the former one. Bernd -- Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/ mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55 Embedded Linux Development and Services -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
