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: [Patch] Fix wrong backup variable initialization in regex



Hi,

Tim Shen <timshen91@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>Yes I think we should keep secret, because the standard doesn't
>specify it. They only way to publish the switch to user is making a
>library extension(is that true?), but there's no obvious benefit to do
>that(is that true? I shall be humble).

Well, the standard doesn't specify it, but that doesn't mean that it does forbid it! If you add a mechanism which uses a mangled name, doesn't require additional template parameters for its implementation, etc, and you document it, everything is perfectly fine. I think that, if only for our internal use (eg, in the testsuite!) it would be quite convenient to have a mechanism which forces the switch, to wit bypasses the automatic switch having to do with brs. And even if at this time it may not make much sense for the users to choose (because one is certainly much faster and only the other correctly handles brs) that may not be so obvious if you add a third.

Paolo


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