This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: STL with gcc3
- From: Ji Li <liji at jlab dot org>
- To: Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com>
- Cc: Matt Austern <austern at apple dot com>, gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 17:56:47 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: STL with gcc3
Hi,
Yes I get the idea. The question is the real code that I am
dealing with is far more comlex than the example I gave here. Ok, I will
try to change the code. Thanks to you all for your help.
Ji Li _/_/_/_/_/ _/
Physics Department _/ _/
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute _/ _/
Tel:(757)269-5328(JLab Office) _/_/_/ _/_/_/_/_/
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Phil Edwards wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 11:39:53AM -0700, Matt Austern wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 17, 2002, at 11:35 AM, Ji Li wrote:
> > >
> > > I believe there must be a way to make gcc-3.0.4 backward
> > > compatable but just could find it. Would you please point the way for
> > > me?
> >
> > You really don't want to do that. The standard says that everything
> > in the Standard Library is supposed to be in namespace std. Other
> > compilers have conformed to the standard for years. You should
> > change your code, for portability if for no other reason.
>
> Matt is correct; your code is not C++. To aid in making the transition, gcc
> 3.x lets you include <backward/iostream.h>. But there is no comparable header
> for <string>, since there was never really a pre-standard string class. So
> you'll have to edit your code anyway; may as well fix the I/O names as well.
>
>
> Phil
>
> --
> If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
> than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek
> not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
> and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. - Samuel Adams
>