Re: [v3] concept check macros, excess-errors

[Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>]

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 06:59:57PM -0700, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> 
> > Thus libstdc++.so has a boatload of undefined references to various
> > instantiations of that function.  (At one point I thought it wasn't actually
> > being called, but that was for the old implementation.)
> > 
> > So, "hello world" fails to link because
> > __glibcpp_function_requires<YourFavoriteConcept>() isn't found, etc.
> 
> can't you just add them as explicit instantiations in src/stl-inst.cc?

Sure, don't see why not.  I didn't think we wanted to go that way, but okay.

(Actually, that might be a good thing to do for no other reason than to
prevent repeated instantiations of these function from showing up in the
users' executables; I had not thought of that before.)  I'll add those
tomorrow.

Ah, speaking of stl-inst.cc, the __sink_unused_warning<> function that's
being conditionally specialized in that file doesn't exist.  The primary
definition was in the old concept-checking code, now gone.  Do we still
need those explicit instantiations?  I don't see it used anywhere else.


Phil

-- 
pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com  |  pme at sources dot redhat dot com
devphil at several other less interesting addresses in various dot domains
The gods do not protect fools.  Fools are protected by more capable fools.