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 09:30:41 -0800 (PST)
- Subject: Re: More test results...
> Right but why were there implicit instantiations being generated? If there
> hadn't been, the problem wouldn't have been noticed.
The original code wasn't posted, but it was likely to not be using
specializations, and thus implicitly generating instantiations of
numeric_limts<string> from the generic numeric_limits template definition.
The details are archived in the thread, I believe.
Anyway...... on to another, separate issue.
> > If you've actually fixed the static const issue, then perhaps the stl
> > changes to enums can be reverted. Thoughts?
>
> I haven't been following that discussion, sorry.
It's the whole
%cat > 1.cc
const int i = 5;
%nm 1.o
00000000 r i
thing
You've said in private email that:
> With -O or -fno-keep-static-consts, it goes away. Perhaps C++ should
> default to -fno-keep-static-consts.
...which I can verify does what I'd expect. Any hope to make this the
default?
thanks,
benjamin