On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 2:42 PM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 1:35 PM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > There has been a lot of talk about making covoar use more C++ > > features. It seems to be an issue on every patch. I almost > > replied to Gedare's comment at the bottom of a patch > > but decided it needed another thread: > > > > "I still struggle reviewing this codebase, in part because it is C+C++ > > (TM) and in part because I'm not so proficient in C++ to make concrete > > recommendations how to write this better. I think, if the goal is > > eventually to make this more C++ like code, then new code coming in > > should aim to move the needle in that direction rather than continue > > to propagate the old ways of doing." > > > Thanks for taking this on. > > > I personally do NOT want to see changes to C++ in one leaf class and > > the other architectures not get the same changes. I would prefer to see > > all these corrections and base changes in the same style with limited > > changes to C-isms. I'm not opposed to the changes but let's take the > > Target class one. There are multiple target classes. Changing one > > independent of the others isn't a good idea. > > > This is reasonable to me. > > > I'd like to see us get a working baseline in and then do something like > > sweep std::string through Target* as a single patch. This is easier to > > test and review since it would only be C string to std::string. Perhaps > > switch to C++ output a file at a time. Redo the report output. Etc. > > Discrete chunks instead of piecemeal. > > > > Covoar has spent years broken and some is from changing working > > things to do things "a better way" with no baseline to check against. > > We need to get a baseline. > > > > Please. Let's get a working baseline and then approach this more > > methodically. No one is going to suffer from seeing a C string a little > > while longer. :) > > > I'm fine, as long as there is a plan in place and some clear > directions. It would help to have tickets to organize the path > forward. > > I'm willing to oblige continued use of C'ism for now, but I want to > know the plan and maybe a deadline of sorts by which I can start to be > picky again :) I don't like to be in limbo. > I'd love to have a deadline but I can't guarantee how long Alex can work on it. But unless he gets pulled, he can pick on this for a while. My guess is that C string to std::string is probably a good pass by itself since method signatures may change. There isn't much file input but that could be a pass by itself along the way, Then sweep output one file at a time leaving reporting for last as a batch. Do you see an order? --joel > > > Thanks. > > > > --joel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > devel mailing list > > devel@rtems.org > > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
