Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Sep 2024 06:16:19 +0000
From:      Paul Floyd <paulf2718@gmail.com>
To:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: The Case for Rust (in any system)
Message-ID:  <80b39d72-860f-4306-b954-05e1b6c5eaa3@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c843feef-4069-44a7-b2f7-5200556c0fb5@digitaldaemon.com>
References:  <202409060725.4867P3ul040678@critter.freebsd.dk> <4E4FB8CC-A974-42C4-95D5-2E1E4BF681AD@freebsd.org> <202409060825.4868PDWO042319@critter.freebsd.dk> <c843feef-4069-44a7-b2f7-5200556c0fb5@digitaldaemon.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On 06-09-24 13:24, Jan Knepper wrote:

> Second this.
> 
> Not surprised...
> 
> I have done this as long as C++ as been around and it always made for 
> better code in the end.
> 
> Truly, this is one of the easy things that could be done with FreeBSD 
> code, and probably would help quite a bit improving the code.

This is roughly what happened with GCC.

Back in the days of GCC 2 there was a strong bias towards C (and against 
C++). That was one of the reasons for the fork and eventual take over by 
EGCS.

Sometime later, around 2008, GCC started switching to using C++ 
compilation rather than C compilation. See

https://lwn.net/Articles/542457/

A+
Paul



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?80b39d72-860f-4306-b954-05e1b6c5eaa3>