2016-08-16 18:52 GMT+03:00 Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi>:
> 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.
For example, its easier and less error prone to define structures with
virtual functions in C++ than write vtables manually in C. So, the adequate
subset of the C++ features can be useful to write more readable and
maintainable C-style code. These features are:

  - abstract classes (well, structures with virtual functions);
  - RTTI;
  - lambda functions;
  - constexpr functions;
  - destructors;
  - templates (very reservedly).

But these features should be avoided (as least for now):

  - exceptions;
  - the parts of the standard library which generates exceptions
    (in particular, regex and thread).

// Dmitry.

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to