This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
[RFC] libstdc++/6720 and libstdc++/6671
- From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at unitus dot it>
- To: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>, Nathan Myers<ncm at cantrip dot org>
- Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 14:34:52 +0200
- Subject: [RFC] libstdc++/6720 and libstdc++/6671
Hi all,
I'd like to ask you opinion about those two, closely related, bug
reports, which I have triaged.
In a nutshell, it looks like the idea of giving the ext/ extension
headers the same name of the corresponding standard headers (e.g.,
<algorithm> => <ext/algorithm>) was not so good afer all :-(
Probably, some confusion stems from entry 5.4 of the FAQ, which hints at
the possibility of using -I: now this is not an option, since, when a
standard header tries to include another standard header which has a
corresponding extension in ext/, it ends up including the latter,
instead of the former!!
In fact, as suggested in 6671, we could simply change the docs
forbidding the use of -I. Alternatively, we could rename the new ext
headers (perhaps just adding a .h, Nathan?) Finally, as far as hash_map,
hash_set, rope ans slist are involved, we could suggest using -idirafter
instead of -I (I did so in answering 6720)
Ideas?
Ciao, Paolo.