Jeff Garzik wrote: > Josh Triplett wrote: >> To the best of my knowledge, nobody involved in the Sparse community has any >> plans to attempt C++. I also think that a subset of the language capable of >> handling any significant number of common programs would end up containing >> most of the language. Even basic support for C++ would require large changes >> to the parser and to the Sparse data structures, and that doesn't even count >> the huge can of worms that would open once you start running into interactions >> between Sparse-annotated types and inheritance or overloading. > > Indeed. The gcc people even wrote their own hand-coded C++ parser for > similar reasons, so I can't see it being an easy integration into > sparse. You might as well fork at that point. While a C++ parser would add significant complexity to Sparse, I would still prefer to integrate it rather than encouraging people to fork. I think a reasonable amount of code sharing would still exist between the C and C++ code, and ideally almost all of the backend code would support both. - Josh Triplett
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
