This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC 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: import changes from gcc-in-cxx branch

From: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>
To: Brad Hards <bradh at frogmouth dot net>
Cc: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 12:14:36 +0100
Subject: Re: import changes from gcc-in-cxx branch
References: <200905152143.37597.bradh@frogmouth.net> <200905161014.01647.bradh@frogmouth.net> <4A0E9786.2080103@gmail.com> <200905162048.00481.bradh@frogmouth.net>

Brad Hards wrote:
> On Saturday 16 May 2009 08:37:58 pm Dave Korn wrote:
>>   Out of curiosity, does the 'd' in '_d' stand for anything?
> Not to me - I didn't write it.
> 
> I do know "d-pointer" as an alternative name for the pimpl idiom in C++, but 
> that might not be the same usage here.
> 
> Possibly for "different"? "declaration"? "delta"?

 ... "_don't_warn"?  Anyway, no big deal, I just wondered.  Maybe we should
adopt a convention for tags <-> typedefs.  Maybe it's not important enough to
bother with and ad-hoc choices will be fine.  Thanks for commenting.

    cheers,
      DaveK

References:
- import changes from gcc-in-cxx branch
  - From: Brad Hards
- Re: import changes from gcc-in-cxx branch
  - From: Brad Hards
- Re: import changes from gcc-in-cxx branch
  - From: Dave Korn
- Re: import changes from gcc-in-cxx branch
  - From: Brad Hards

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