This is the mail archive of the 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]

Re: Removal of pre-ISO C++ items from include/backwards

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, skaller wrote:

| On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 20:34 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, skaller wrote:
| > 
| > | I should point out retaining 'old' features can create a
| > | significant maintenance burden for gcc developers,
| > 
| > In this specific case, what are they?
| You're in a better position than me to determine that.
| I don't know: it's a generalisation from experience
| with half a dozen compiler development projects I track.

Yes, that is why I asked `in this specific case'.

I have no problem with letting the `old' headers as they are without
adding new stuff to them -- it would break less old or existing codes
not to add to those headers than removing them.  
So, except the mechanical annual copyright update, there is no much
those headers require us to do on regular basis.  We don't need to
update them with newer allocation strategy, thready safety, default
allocators, etc.  They fact that they are not exactly like the tr1
hasj containers is not an issue -- that is precisely they are there
for compatibility.

-- Gaby

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]