This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
| Other format: | [Raw text] | |
So, do you think it would be OK to rename 'class' above to, say, 'super_class'?
This field is used in GNUstep. What do you propose that code should do
to work with both versions? Change the name only if __cplusplus is
defined?
Change the name unconditionally... please? :-)
Only if you can give us a really good answer to the first question. :)
Again: What do you propose that code should do to work with both versions?
If you rename 'class' to 'super_class' and reference it as 'super_class', then this will work in all four of our C flavors, so I'm not sure I understand your question... Or are you suggesting that we do something like
#ifdef __cplusplus Class super_class; #else Class class; #endif
? While possible, I'd submit that this approach will be more confusing
in the long run.
Yes - it would be messy and confusing. Why don't you just rename it and
increase the ObjC runtime version number ?
Then GNUstep can check for the ObjC runtime version number, and use class
or super_class depending on the ObjC runtime version number.
--Zem -------------------------------------------------------------- Ziemowit Laski 1 Infinite Loop, MS 301-2K Mac OS X Compiler Group Cupertino, CA USA 95014-2083 Apple Computer, Inc. +1.408.974.6229 Fax .5477
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |