← Back to context Comment by uecker 2 days ago I think the fallacy of this argument is obvious. 2 comments uecker Reply pjmlp 1 day ago Not really, given that GCC no longer compiles with a pure C compiler.Unless of course, you don't have anything to do, and feel like bootstraping GCC 16, using a compiler chain all the way back to 2012 thereabouts. uecker 1 day ago The question is whether GCC is a good example of the benefits of C++ for compilers. Considering the code looks to 95% like C code and uses data structures that we originally implemented in C, I don't see this argument.
pjmlp 1 day ago Not really, given that GCC no longer compiles with a pure C compiler.Unless of course, you don't have anything to do, and feel like bootstraping GCC 16, using a compiler chain all the way back to 2012 thereabouts. uecker 1 day ago The question is whether GCC is a good example of the benefits of C++ for compilers. Considering the code looks to 95% like C code and uses data structures that we originally implemented in C, I don't see this argument.
uecker 1 day ago The question is whether GCC is a good example of the benefits of C++ for compilers. Considering the code looks to 95% like C code and uses data structures that we originally implemented in C, I don't see this argument.
Not really, given that GCC no longer compiles with a pure C compiler.
Unless of course, you don't have anything to do, and feel like bootstraping GCC 16, using a compiler chain all the way back to 2012 thereabouts.
The question is whether GCC is a good example of the benefits of C++ for compilers. Considering the code looks to 95% like C code and uses data structures that we originally implemented in C, I don't see this argument.