This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug libstdc++/15910] can't compile self defined void distance(std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>)
- From: "adah at netstd dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 9 Aug 2005 01:45:12 -0000
- Subject: [Bug libstdc++/15910] can't compile self defined void distance(std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>)
- References: <20040610143911.15910.king.benjamin@mh-hannover.de>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From adah at netstd dot com 2005-08-09 01:45 -------
(In reply to comment #59)
> Subject: Re: can't compile self defined void distance(std::vector<T>,
std::vector<T>)
> "adah at netstd dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> | Does a compiler serve its users or the Standard committee?
> Answer: Does a compiler that does not implement the standard specification
> serves its users?
> -- Gaby
Answer to answer: Does a compiler that implement a wrong specification in the
Standard serves the users?
A bug in the Standard does not prevent a bug in the compiler from being a bug!
I am not requiring that GCC must fix the bug (I do not want to argue here
endlessly as well), but I am dissatisfied that you do not think it a bug. Just
imagine the complete loss of an innocent user that happens to define a distance
(vector<...>,...) (`I can name my global functions as I like, or what is the
purpose of the std namespace?'), when the error messages seem to show that the
compiler is talking nonsense!
BTW, I do not think a common user has channels to talk to the Standard
committee. Compiler vendors have.
My opinion is that the bug should be `suspended' or `deferred', while
displaying a more friendly error message should be added to the to-do list of
GCC.
Best regards,
Yongwei
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15910