This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


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

Re: Proposal for the 'long long' problems



> IMHO, we should not have any _USE_C99 references in the library at all.

Reasonable people may differ on this point.

> on C99 library features unnecessarily.  In particular, strtoll is 
> something we would better just slurp into our own code, and not need 
> to check for or depend on.  (We can also supply our own strtoll that
> uses the same code underneath.) The implementation would be better for
> our needs anyhow, and would allow better range checking.

No.

We've never agreed on this point.

Anyway.

Conceptually, my thinking on this point is that v2 had iostream overloads 
for long long. The thought is that --enable-long-long could default to on 
(but able to be toggled off) to gracefully support backwards 
compatibility. The newer C99 features should have their own flag, since 
we don't have to worry about what v2 did. 

Sorry if this was unclear.

-benjamin


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