explicit specialization in non-namespace scope

Matthias Mueller matthias@ica1.uni-stuttgart.de
Wed Sep 23 08:43:00 GMT 1998

Nathan Myers writes:
 > Mark Mitchell wrote:
 > > 
 > > >>>>> "Nathan" == Nathan Myers <ncm@cygnus.com> writes: 
 > > 
 > >     Nathan> Digital is a poor choice of compilers to check
 > >     Nathan> conformance.
 > > 
 > > But EDG is a good choice, and it too complains on specializations in
 > > class scope.
 > Yes, I have written to them about this.

I would like to note that this depends very much on the compiler
version used. Digital cxx 6.x has improved much against 5.x. It is
based on a quite recent version of EDG. Has short compile times 
even with the new iostreams  and optimizes quite well. 

On alpha-osf-4.0c I can't compile my project with egcs-1.1 
(gives a strange syntax error I don't get on solaris-2.5.1)
but it works well with cxx. With the 19980906 snapshot it also works. 

At the moment compilers develop rapidly, we should be careful whenever
we judge a compiler and honour the effort of companies who try to
approach the standard with new releases.

Best regards,

| Matthias Mueller                    matthias@ica1.uni-stuttgart.de    |
|                         http://www.ica1.uni-stuttgart.de/~matthias    |
|        ICA 1, Pfaffenwaldring 27, D-70569 Stuttgart (Germany)         |
|           Tel. 49-(0)711/685-7606, Fax. 49-(0)711/685-3658            |

More information about the Gcc mailing list