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: More test results...


>>>>> "Phil" == Phil Edwards <phil@jaj.com> writes:

> 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.

No, but the patch under discussion changes several static data members to
be inherited, so the mangled name is different.  If the default is wrong
for a type, it must be overridden in the (derived) specialization, so the
mangled name depends on whether or not the default is correct.

This might not actually be a problem in practice, but it makes me nervous.

Jason


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