This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: More test results...
- From: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 07:33:21 -0800 (PST)
- Subject: Re: More test results...
> True. But if it only has meaning as a specialization, why was the change
> useful in the first place?
Compatibility testing revealed that there were duplicate symbols due to
compiler oddnesses. Since no patch to the compiler was forthcoming, the
library switched to using a non-templatized base class to hold the static
const data members, thus side-stepping the linkage issue.
Got it? At this point, I think the preference is to keep the code the way
it is now.
If you've actually fixed the static const issue, then perhaps the stl
changes to enums can be reverted. Thoughts?
-benjamin