This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [wwwdocs] Additional C++ entries in changes.html
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>
> >> + <li>G++ is now <strong>much</strong> more conformant to the
> >> ISO/ANSI
> >
> > I think we're either conformant or not ;-) The "much more" sounds
> > very marketing-departement-ish.
>
> Why? We are more conformant than before because we accepts more well-formed
> programs which before were rejected, and we reject more ill-formed programs
> which before were accepted. Maybe my english is in fault? How would you
> rephrase it?
If you want to be pedantic about conformance being a binary thing, I'd
phrase it as something like "G++ is now <strong>much</strong> closer to full
conformance to the ISO/ANSI..."
Out of curiosity, what are the known areas where G++ is still
non-conformant? ("export", obviously, is one of them.) Would a
c++98status.html web page, analogous to the c99status.html page, be a useful
thing?
--
Jonathan Lennox
lennox at cs dot columbia dot edu