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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Poor me... (was: Re: [PATCH, RFA] Reworked fix for PR4402)


On Sat, Dec 01, 2001 at 08:43:09PM -0500, Phil Edwards wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 01:34:09AM +0000, Nathan Myers wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 01, 2001 at 08:24:37PM -0500, Phil Edwards wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 01:17:58AM +0000, Nathan Myers wrote:
> > > > The Standard requires parsing separators in floats, and there is no
> > > > prospect of that changing. 
> 
> Just as a reminder, if this is patched, the patch should be surrounded by
> _GLIBCPP_RESOLVE_LIB_DEFECTS with an appropriate comment.  See any of the
> other occurances of this macro for an example.  Also a notes need to be
> added to the howto.html.

(Of course only the formatting portion should be so guarded; parsing
is not the subject of any issues list, it's just required by the 
standard.)

Are you aware that a large number of DRs were approved and voted out
as a Technical Corrigendum, so are now officially Standard?  Probably
any guards on resolutions mentioned in the TC should be removed, or
changed to something that defaults to "on".

IMHO the issues lists should be documented in a separate category from 
extensions, and presented rather more prominently.  Extensions are 
something one can reasonably ignore, but a careful user must not 
ignore defect reports and their resolutions.

I notice that neither the local copies of, nor the official on-line
versions of the issues lists, are linked from the page; we only
have links to particular issue numbers.  

Nathan Myers
ncm at cantrip dot org


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