[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ISO C++ and Octave
From: |
Mumit Khan |
Subject: |
Re: ISO C++ and Octave |
Date: |
Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:28:04 -0600 (CST) |
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 30-Jan-2001, Mumit Khan <address@hidden> wrote:
> |
> | 1. Just a few remaining missing namespace qualifiers, a minutes fixed
> | those.
>
> OK, if you have a patch, please send it on.
Will do, but it'll be a few days before I get to it again.
> | 2. The code for equal (src/mx-inlines.cc) currently causes a problem
> | for gcc-2.97/libstdc++-v3, but I haven't been able to reduce the testcase
> | yet. Easy workarounds: (1) use std::equal, which works with older
> | compilers as well, (2) explicitly use ::equal. It is not a problem in
> | Octave code as far as I can see.
>
> I'd also be willing to rename those functions to be mx_XXX to avoid
> this kind of problem.
Easily done. I'll add that as a separate patch from (1).
> | 3. This is the sticky one - the interface to the streams has changed
> | significantly and so we do need to update anything built on top of
> | std::filebuf.
>
> If I can build a current snapshot of gcc 3.0 maybe I can get an idea
> of how hard this would be to fix.
As of about a week or ago, libstdc++-v3 actually somewhat works on Linux,
at least any program linked against the library doesn't crash at startup.
It's been stable on Solaris 8 for a while now.
> Do you think it would be possible to write code that would work with
> both old and new compilers in these cases? If not, then the idea of
> using a macro seems OK, or we can hide the details in some function(s).
For my own code, I had no choice but to use the macro to separate old
from the new, but I'll have to understand the Octave implementation more
before I know what will work. From a quick look, it's a question of just
a few changes, but that's being over-optimistic.
I'll dig into it this weekend, and hopefully have an implementation, or
at least a much better idea.
Regards,
Mumit
- ISO C++ and Octave, Mumit Khan, 2001/01/30
- ISO C++ and Octave, John W. Eaton, 2001/01/30
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave,
Mumit Khan <=
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave, John W. Eaton, 2001/01/31
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave, Mumit Khan, 2001/01/31
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave, John W. Eaton, 2001/01/31
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave, Mumit Khan, 2001/01/31
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave, John W. Eaton, 2001/01/31
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave, Mumit Khan, 2001/01/31
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave, Mumit Khan, 2001/01/31
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave, John W. Eaton, 2001/01/31
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave, Mumit Khan, 2001/01/31
- Re: ISO C++ and Octave, John W. Eaton, 2001/01/31