This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [v3] annex D 8 and 9 for C++0x
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
| Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
| > | math functions. There might be some API differences in the regex stuff
| > | and
| > | maybe in a few other places.
| > I added literal types supports to the regex library (C++0x). Last
| > time I hard of it, it might also go through a slight tweak. But,
| > nothing major. So the API between TR1 and C++0x will be different.
| > But, nothing major. And I'm not sure the version in TR1 should be
| > synced with that in C++0x. After all they are different specs.
| > -- Gaby
| I agree that it would be a good idea to have tr1 and std be true to the
| respective standards. It seems like it would be very possible to have one
| representation that would serve both standards with very little pain. There
| would be some mechanism to support the two as appropriate. It actually looks
| like someone did this with the tr1_impl directory and the std headers
| including from there. I didn't see in any of the three regex headers where
| certain features were allowed from tr1 and not std or vice versa. Maybe when
| std is more ... std there can be switches in the impl to allow differences:
| #ifdef INCLUDE_AS_TR1
I wouldn't like us to suddenly deprecate tr1 stuffs. I'm all for
mechanisms that would make both specs implemented by single sources if
that is possible.
| About this separate math function standard. Where would that be? I'd like to
| check it out. Also, is there a TR2 brewing somewhere? All I see is the RFP.
yes, there are tr2 stuff in the pipeline. for example, the filesystem
library has been carefully sequestered in tr2, to be released after