Re: Is ObjC++ still in time for 4.0?

[Ziemowit Laski]

> Zem is asking me to design his frontend's data structures for him.  I
> don't have time to do that right now, and Zem hasn't done the design
> work himself, so we're waiting.

Since Geoff has objected to every design proposal I made, then naturally
I was (and am) expecting a constructive alternative.

> My last comment to Zem was:
>
> > I still don't really know enough, but my best guess is that you
> > should put an extra field in the lang_type structure for C, and in
> > lang_type_class for C++.  Try that and let me know how it goes.

...to which I replied:

  I have two questions/requests:
    (1) Should I add the extra field "unconditionally", i.e., so that 
is is there and unused even for plain C and C+?
    (2) Can you post your response to gcc or gcc-patches, preferrably 
as a response to my last e-mail (see URL above), so that other people
        may chime in?

  Thanks.

...to which Geoff politely retorted:

   (1) Zem, I really don't have time to design this for you.  Please do 
your own work.
   (2) Done.

(For those of you wondering, the above exchange took place within the 
confines of Apple's bug-tracking system.   You'll have to Geoff as to 
why he chose to conduct it there instead of the public FSF list where 
it belongs.)

So, the current status is:
   (a) Geoff has refused to provide an acceptable design;
   (b) Geoff has objected to all other designs presented.

--Zem