This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [RFC] exports and linkage for TR1
- From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>
- To: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
- Cc: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 22:50:42 +0200
- Subject: Re: [RFC] exports and linkage for TR1
- References: <20061011223631.65441fb5.bkoz@redhat.com>
Hi Benjamin,
I feel like TR1 is less in flux now. What do others think? Should we
start exporting bits, and thus having to deal with compatibility?
Thoughts about particular bits that should be avoided?
In my opinion the issue isn't particularly urgent. In this sense: as you
remind elsewhere, we could as well wait a bit more (probably the erase
overloads will change in C++0x) and then add exports for the
corresponding, more stable C++0x bits in namespace *std* instead of
mixing now tr1 and std facilities. I have similar feelings about the
tr1::type_traits issue: instead of using tr1:: names in the
implementation of standard facilities, we can as well wait a bit more
(see the message from Howard about a few bits still in flux) and then
use the C++0x type_traits facilities in std.
Paolo.