This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]

Re: Is this legal C++?

To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
Subject: Re: Is this legal C++?
From: Zack Weinberg <zack at wolery dot cumb dot org>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 08:49:41 -0700
Cc: mrs at windriver dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <200004200323.UAA17524@kankakee.wrs.com> <20000420000657I.mitchell@codesourcery.com>

On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 12:06:57AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> >>>>> "Mike" == Mike Stump <mrs@windriver.com> writes:
> 
>     Mike> do this (that I know of), and since ptrfun() works, I think
>     Mike> it is a fine extension, and I'll go donate my kidney this
>     Mike> weekend.
> 
> That's very noble.  But, I'm not sure we want to do this.  There is
> one very good reason not to: it's not ISO C++, and that's what we're
> trying to focus on.
...

I don't actually care whether this extension is implemented.  I only
brought it up because I was trying to fix g++.robertl/eb127.C.  I had
a patch which made the compiler complain about a missing ->* rather
than crash, and I wasn't sure if eb127 was legal C++.  Jason has now
fixed eb127 without modifying the test case, so presumably it is...

zw

References:
- Re: Is this legal C++?
  - From: Mike Stump
- Re: Is this legal C++?
  - From: Mark Mitchell

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