[cfe-dev] On the preferred use of C++ in the clang source code

[Michael Marcin]

Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Nov 9, 2007, at 8:55 AM, James Widman wrote:
> 
>> I've heard that clang is meant to be implemented in a "subset of C+
>> +" (which I guess means that some core language features are barred
>> from use).
>>
>> Is there a document anywhere that describes and motivates that subset?
> 
> It is pretty subjective.  We do use almost all C++ features somewhere  
> in the (greater llvm) code base.  It's really more about making clear  
> and simple code than it is about banning specific language features.   
> Some coding guidelines are available here:
> http://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html
> 
> That said, there are two features we don't like:  RTTI and EH.  This  
> is because they violate the "don't pay for it if you don't use it"  
> principle.  


Is this violation intrinsic to the concepts and requirements of RTTI 
and/or EH or is this an implementation issue?

I have no personal attachment to RTTI but EH and its associated safety 
guarantees allow me to read, write and reason about code much better.

If these /are/ implementation issues does CLang plan to do better in its 
C++ implementation?


Thanks,

Michael Marcin


P.S. Sorry for dredging up such an old post but I'm really behind 
reading this list :)