g++ 2.95 typeinfo::name()

[Jon Cast]

Dima Volodin wrote:
> >The standard is irrelevant in this case.  What Oliver said must be
>>true, must be true, really.  Just meeting the standard is fine in many
>>cases, however, at times, we do want to do more than the standard.

>Doing that encourages writing of non-compliant and non-portable code,
>which is bad, really bad.

I hate to butt in here, being relatively new to this list, but it seems to
me that imposing brain-damaged restrictions is what would be bad.  I don't
have any problem with extensions, as long as they're clean and clearly
documented as such.  What I have a problem with is providing nearly useless
"features" because ISO doesn't provide useful semantics.  Standards are
great tools /for the user/.   They shouldn't get in the user's way.
Jon Cast