This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: g++ 2.95 typeinfo::name()
- To: Mike Stump <mrs at windriver dot com>
- Subject: Re: g++ 2.95 typeinfo::name()
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: 22 Jan 2001 19:45:43 +0100
- Cc: aoliva at redhat dot com, rssh at gvinpin dot grad dot kiev dot ua, Oliver dot Kellogg at vs dot dasa dot de, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <200101221831.KAA10525@kankakee.wrs.com>
Mike Stump <mrs@windriver.com> writes:
| > To: <rssh@gvinpin.grad.kiev.ua>
| > Cc: "Kellogg, Oliver" <Oliver.Kellogg@vs.dasa.de>,
| > "'gcc@gcc.gnu.org'" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
| > From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
| > Date: 22 Jan 2001 10:58:25 -0200
|
| > On Jan 22, 2001, <rssh@gvinpin.grad.kiev.ua> wrote:
|
| > > On 22 Jan 2001, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
|
| > >> Yep. It would also be correct if it just returned an empty string for
| > >> all types.
|
| > > No. must be true:
|
| > > typeof(x)==typeof(y) <=> typeof(x).name equal typeof(y).name()
|
| > Nope. All the standard says is that the result of type_info::name()
| > is an implementation-defined null-terminated byte string.
|
| The standard is irrelevant in this case. What Oliver said must be
| true, must be true, really. Just meeting the standard is fine in many
| cases, however, at times, we do want to do more than the standard.
You're making a wish and I understand that. But that doesn't make the
current behaviour a bug as far as the standard is concerned. That was
the original issue.
Sure, as far QoI is concerned there is room for improvement.
-- Gaby
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com