This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C++ PATCH: Reimplementation of error.c
Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> >>>>> Nathan Sidwell <nathan@acm.org> writes:
>
> > The TS_PEDANTIC_NAME flag will change the generic rendering to
> > `X<class>::m', so that one can distinguish between the generic template
> > X, and the instantiation with a type coincidentally named `T'.
>
> I think that should still be X<T>. X<class> is invalid syntax, and thus
> seems an odd choice for "pedantic".
You are correct, it's an erroneous part of the documentation stuff I was
working on. I'll remove it.
> Where do you expect this type to be printed? I would be surprised to find
> it outside the definition of X, where X<T> is unambiguous.
The (unsubmitted) doc stuff needed guaranteed unique keys for each thing
documented. The flag should really be called `mangle' (function name
mangling wouldn't work for non-function things). Now I'm not so sure that
was the best way of doing it anyway.
nathan
--
Dr Nathan Sidwell :: Computer Science Department :: Bristol University
I have seen the death of PhotoShop -- it is called GIMP
nathan@acm.org http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~nathan/ nathan@cs.bris.ac.uk