This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: More test results...
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 06:12:52PM +0000, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >>>>> "Phil" == Phil Edwards <phil@jaj.com> writes:
>
> > I think the std_limits.h file became cleaner to read with that patch.
> > Must it be reverted?
>
> I argued against it in an earlier note; I don't like that changing the
> value means changing the ABI. Do you disagree?
For the <limits> header? I didn't think the ABI included things like the
values of numeric_limits<> on particular platforms.
For the STL headers -- which I think is the earlier note you're talking
about -- I wouldn't fight changing the enums back to static consts, from
this patch:
* include/bits/stl_tree.h (_S_rb_tree_red): Make enum.
(_S_rb_tree_black): Make enum.
Clean. Format.
* include/bits/stl_bvector.h (__WORD_BIT): To _M_word_bit, enum.
* include/bits/stl_algo.h (__stl_chunk_size): _M_chunk_size, enum.
(__stl_threshold): _M_threshold, enum.
* src/stl-inst.cc: Same.
* config/linker-map.gnu: Remove.
The std_limits.h file doesn't have any enums in the parts which Benjmain
patched; does it fall into the changing-value-changing-ABI problem?
Phil
--
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. - Samuel Adams