On 2016-08-16 18:52:39 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 08/16/2016 05:47 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> > I realize there's little technical reason why we *need* C++ support. The
> > level if discipline applied to our codebase negates some of the benefits
> > of C++. But maintaining the discipline takes a lot of time and effort,
> > and makes it more difficult to attract new contributors.
>
> I suspect that it would take as much
> discipline to keep a C++ codebase
> readable, as the current C codebase. If
> not more.
Well, having typed pg_list.h style lists, ilist.h linked lists,
hash-tables, and proper typechecks for pg_nodes.h instead of the NodeTag
stuff, would surely make life easier.
But given the small subset of C++ available on all our supported
platforms... I think we'd first need to make the decision to cut support
for some platforms, before using C++. Which imo is a distinct task from
*allowing* to compile with a C++ compiler.
