From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Derek M Jones Subject: Re: support for C++ ? Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:21:49 +0100 Message-ID: <468112ED.7050104@knosof.co.uk> References: <4680A013.8030707@freedesktop.org> <4680F209.7070601@garzik.org> <46811043.90207@freedesktop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.48]:44386 "EHLO mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752877AbXFZNV4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2007 09:21:56 -0400 In-Reply-To: <46811043.90207@freedesktop.org> Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Josh Triplett Cc: Jeff Garzik , Mathieu Bouchard , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org Josh, > 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. Experience suggests that a C++ front end is around a factor of seven times larger than a C front end. There are many more syntactic ambiguities in C++ that require symbol table information to resolve (even then life can be tough). Code sharing would be possible in the sense that if a C++ parser were implemented it would be close to handling C out of the box. -- Derek M. Jones tel: +44 (0) 1252 520 667 Knowledge Software Ltd mailto:derek@knosof.co.uk Applications Standards Conformance Testing http://www.knosof.co.uk