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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Should 3.2 still search backward/ headers by default?

From: Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com>
To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at unitus dot it>, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 21:24:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Should 3.2 still search backward/ headers by default?
References: <20020524160946.A25546@disaster.basement.lan> <m3ptzl5inp.fsf@merlin.nerim.net> <20020524212731.A27183@disaster.basement.lan> <3CEF870A.2050305@unitus.it> <m3adqo5r0l.fsf@merlin.nerim.net>


Okay, that seems to be consensus:  we leave them "on", at least for 3.2.

(Note that I'm only talking about not searching them by default; of course
we'll still be shipping and installing backward/* headers until the time_t's
roll over...)


Phil

-- 
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace.  We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.            - Samuel Adams

References:
- Should 3.2 still search backward/ headers by default?
  - From: Phil Edwards
- Re: Should 3.2 still search backward/ headers by default?
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: Should 3.2 still search backward/ headers by default?
  - From: Phil Edwards
- Re: Should 3.2 still search backward/ headers by default?
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: Should 3.2 still search backward/ headers by default?
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis

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