This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


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

Re: PATCH: Adhere to section 17.4.1.2 clause 5 of ISO 14882:1998


On Sun, Apr 08, 2001 at 07:45:05PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Nathan Myers <ncm@nospam.cantrip.org> writes:
> | On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 07:49:01PM -0500, Loren James Rittle wrote:
> | > Are you honestly telling me that there is no agreement between
> | > committee members that the above quoted section has the obvious
> | > meaning?  To me, errno is explicitly listed as being a macro 
> | > under C++!
> | 
> | Twice, in fact.  This supposed lack of agreement is just confusion on 
> | Gaby's part.  Steve is pretty clear that it says it has to be a macro, 
> 
> In which case he wouldn't have proposed:
>    Two possible resolutions to the inconsistencies in the C++ standard:
>    1. errno is in the global namespace, not in namespace std.
>    2. errno must be a macro, in which case you would never put a
>    namespace qualifier on it.

Steve _always_ proposes an alternative that means Sun doesn't have to 
change anything.  I suppose that's part of his job; anyway it's not 
meant to be taken seriously.  Certainly, changing errno from a macro 
to a global would be a big change, and the LWG isn't about to do it.  
It may clean up the language about what errno looks like in C, but 
that wouldn't change anything normative.  

Nathan Myers
ncm at cantrip dot org


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