This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C++ language lawyer question
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
- Date: 02 Oct 2003 23:09:22 +0200
- Subject: Re: C++ language lawyer question
- Organization: Integrable Solutions
- References: <E23F868D-F2CF-11D7-8F0D-003065A77310@apple.com><Pine.BSF.4.56.0309300106340.66215@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at><m3pthi20td.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net><Pine.BSF.4.58.0310022258560.14398@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at> writes:
| [ Reply-To: gcc-patches ]
|
| On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > Despite what has been claimed about the simplicy of the issue, it is
| > not as clear cut some would like to believe.
|
| Thanks, at least my intuition wasn't completely off-base. ;-)
Yup. the whole C++ core group initialy had the same intuition as you,
and the behaviour was not even intended :-)
[...]
| What do you think about the rewrite below? (Not installed yet.)
It is OK.
Thank you!
-- Gaby