OpenMP and C++

If you plan to introduce C++ officially, would you mind have a
discussion on which parts of the C++ language are ok and which are not
ok. I'd be strongly in favor of not using RTTI and EH. I think both of
those should be disabled in the build and never used. (Performance
reasons)

There are also a few c++11 things which are popular, but may not
always make sense. Stuff like that can be handled on a case-by-case
basis.

From: "C Bergström" <cbergstrom@pathscale.com>
To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel@anl.gov>
Cc: "Terry L Wilmarth" <terry.l.wilmarth@intel.com>, "openmp-dev" <openmp-dev@lists.llvm.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:13:43 PM
Subject: OpenMP and C++

If you plan to introduce C++ officially, would you mind have a

Not that such a discussion is a bad thing, but I'll point out that roughly 25% of the runtime source files are already C++ files, so this is not really an introduction.

discussion on which parts of the C++ language are ok and which are
not
ok. I'd be strongly in favor of not using RTTI and EH. I think both
of
those should be disabled in the build and never used. (Performance
reasons)

Indeed; these things are already a part of LLVM's policy.

-Hal

Where's the face palm emoji when I need it.. That's what I get for early morning reply

Original Message

That all sounds good to me. We've also traditionally tried to avoid any dependence on STL, at least for release builds.