This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [patch] debug mode
- From: François Dumont <francois dot cppdevs at free dot fr>
- To: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
- Cc: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 21:44:05 +0200
- Subject: Re: [patch] debug mode
- References: <4C4F3C54.8020106@free.fr> <4C50900B.6030705@oracle.com> <4C53E2FD.5070206@free.fr> <4C545CB5.4090902@oracle.com> <4C545E6D.5050409@oracle.com> <4C6BD03E.1050706@free.fr> <4C6BDBFB.6000307@oracle.com>
On 08/18/2010 03:11 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
About __first and __last, I would suggest
not changing those to __f and __l if at all possible: short names are
always more dangerous vs BADNAMES on some less widespread machines.
Hi
Just regarding this point, I grep the lib headers, in bits
sub-folder there are 730 occurrences of __f and about 940 of __l. So I
don't think my usage of it in debug mode will introduce any regression.
Moreover I consider using this technique to limit line width when I saw
some code in debug headers that was already using __f, __l. Do you still
want me to revert this point ?
Francois