Re: Transitioning libgomp from C to C++ implementation

Martin Uecker <[email protected]> writes:

> I am not convinced that moving to C++ actually makes code more
> type safe or otherwise better.  

It certainly does, by providing a way to implement type-safe containers
for instance, and by providing generic mechanisms of initialization and
cleanup.

These do not require the standard library to be benefited from, even.

> I am not working on libgomp, so my opinion may not be important.
> But  for libraries such libubsan I observe that people created 
> alternatives in C so having a C version would generally be more
> useful. 

That's a strange choice, given that all compilers that implement ubsan
also implement C++ (to my awareness).

Perhaps there are other factors at play, such as libsanitizer not being
possible to compile in a given environment.

Indeed, that's why e.g. Managarm has a C++ reimplementation of libubsan
and friends for its kernel:
https://github.com/managarm/managarm/blob/master/kernel/thor/generic/ubsan.cpp
-- 
Arsen Arsenović

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEKBAEWCgCyFiEE/uKz0RP8AKMWLWBhUsKUMB6ixJMFAmn9o2obFIAAAAAABAAO
bWFudTIsMi41KzEuMTIsMiwyXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25z
Lm9wZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGRUUyQjNEMTEzRkMwMEEzMTYyRDYw
NjE1MkMyOTQzMDFFQTJDNDkzGBxhYXJzZW5vdmljQGJheWxpYnJlLmNvbQAKCRBS
wpQwHqLEkzRGAP9B/7Jty9CXTr2i8EyxPy1SRSQdSB9zwkWp/y8BArgykAD/apKw
keoho3QLl/U51K+ncSbCLarzbrwJ6IMekC8H1gc=
=cGfk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----