This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Anyone got irix5? I have questions about your ctypeimplementation
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>,"ro at TechFak dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE" <ro at TechFak dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>
- Cc: "aoliva at redhat dot com" <aoliva at redhat dot com>, "cgf at redhat dot com" <cgf at redhat dot com>,"gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>,"libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 19:09:03 -0000
- Subject: Re: Anyone got irix5? I have questions about your ctypeimplementation
> So for that reason and also for being able to specifically target
> pre-irix6.5, IMHO I prefer to solve it the way I originally did with
> libstdc++-v3 os_defines.h.
We're really just debating which evil is more evil. There are lots of
evils
in both directions.
Your points are valid, but not strong enough to cause us to do something
different on IRIX, with respect to everything else. And having programs
behave different due to whether or not a V3 header is included first is
a user-visible problem; maintenance issues are visible only to us. So,
let's go with CPLUSPLUS_CPP_SPEC.
I hope that everyone will strongly encourage (and help!) V3 maintainers to
do the grungy work required to make the library play nicely with system
C libraries. Then, all the evils can be eliminated.
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com