C++ err msgs

Jason Merrill jason@cygnus.com
Thu May 11 13:14:00 GMT 2000

>>>>> llewelly  <llewelly@dbritsch.dsl.xmission.com> writes:

 > On 11 May 2000, Jason Merrill wrote:
 > [snip]
 >>  > But I suspect that might not a good idea for the long time.
 >> I wouldn't bother.  I'll stop objecting to this change--but we should add
 >> C++ rules to the coding standards doc.

 > What about http://sourceware.cygnus.com/libstdc++/17_intro/C++STYLE ?

Good point.  Though I've objected to various things in that document
before, and people agreed (with some of my objections, at least), but
nothing ever happened.

I just went ahead and fixed the rules for try/catch, since everyone agreed
with the change when I brought it up before.  Unfortunately, it looks like
the existing code uses the rule everyone agreed was broken.  Sigh.

BTW, what was the rationale for this->func()?  There isn't one in the
document.  Inside templates, we will need to start qualifying all names
(not just functions) inherited from base classes with this->, so perhaps
it's simpler just to always do it.


More information about the Libstdc++ mailing list