Allow C++ or C99 in sim/*?

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>]

Hello,

Back in '95ish, I adopted ISO C 90 as its programming language for PSIM. 
 My decision was based on two assumptions: a C++ compiler would be more 
buggy than C; the C language would be easier for a compiler to optimize 
than C++; no one in their right mind still used K&R C.  Over time, the 
ISO C 90 assumption was gradually extended to other simulators (via 
sim/igen and sim/common) and that led to the sim/ directory requiring 
ISO C.  This was all well before gdb/ adopted ISO C 90.  History has 
shown this to be a good decision.

Now, many years later, I think its time to revisit this:

Should the simulator directories allow more modern languages?  I can see 
several options:

- C99 which would allow C++ comments:
	// a comment
and declarations anywhere:
	foo (); int i; bar ()
and access to int32 et.al. types.  What else?

- C++ which would also allow access to objects and (ulgh?) templates 
(replacement for the sim-endian macro stuff?)

- Oh what the heck, Java and gcj ...

C99 should be a done deal.  While I hate C++, making GDB developers 
debug C++ code would be a good thing (TM), and there are a few chunks of 
the simulator code that really shouldn't be C.  Java would be, well, 
interesting.

Thoughts?  Coding standards?

Andrew