This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [PATCH] Update backward/algo.h
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 11:55:34AM -0800, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
>
> > I don't like seeing a carefully designed structure allowed to rot
> > just because nobody can be bothered to understand why it was built,
> > and then tearing it down because it was allowed to rot.
>
> Aaah. May I suggest you re-read the parts of "How Buildings Learn" that
> deal with the design of I. M. Pei's Media Lab building at MIT? Suggested
> reading: Chapter 11. Here's a relevant excerpt (p 179)
>
> "The Media Lab is burdened with a number of expensive overspecified
> spaces, such as a pair of rooms designed for wall-size
> rear-projection--research that was no longer even going on when the
> building opened."
I believe we still use make.
Nobody has claimed to have fixed the bug, verified that it was fixed,
or even verified that any GNU make maintainer ever admitted that it
is a bug.
> The header design is not sacrosanct. It should evolve to be
> minimally-confusing, maximally-flexible.
It should work correctly.
Otherwise, the headers might as well contain only comments.
> I prefer a design not based on an extreme special case that rarely,
> if ever, happens.
Are you saying you never hit control-C during a build? Having header
files with my latest changes deleted by make was an experience I didn't
care ever to repeat.
It seems to me that the burden is on whoever wants to eliminate
(or ignore) the rule to demonstrate that it cannot happen any more.
Your test demonstrated only that it doesn't always happen.
Nathan Myers
ncm@cantrip.org