From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 15 06:38:26 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAE9316A4CE; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 06:38:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from sizone.org (mortar.sizone.org [65.126.154.242]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A13B243D2F; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 06:38:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dgilbert@daveg.ca) Received: by sizone.org (Postfix, from userid 66) id BC7BB30A70; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 09:38:25 -0500 (EST) Received: by canoe.dclg.ca (Postfix, from userid 101) id 6FD401D2309; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 08:56:33 -0500 (EST) From: David Gilbert MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16469.46609.293027.840180@canoe.dclg.ca> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 08:56:33 -0500 To: Daniel Lang In-Reply-To: <20040315102516.GH15687@atrbg11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> References: <16468.65270.123954.862565@canoe.dclg.ca> <20040315013817.GA68381@crodrigues.org> <16469.3340.625290.632134@canoe.dclg.ca> <20040315102516.GH15687@atrbg11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 14) "Reasonable Discussion" XEmacs Lucid cc: Craig Rodrigues cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org cc: David Gilbert Subject: Re: GCC include files conundrum. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 14:38:27 -0000 >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Lang writes: Daniel> Hi, David Gilbert wrote on Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 08:55:24PM Daniel> -0500: [..] >> I'll ignore the condescending tone for a momment. It's worth >> noting that everything works by simply having a copy of strstream.h >> in the backward directory. Maybe the right path to take here is to >> include that file much as we include old versions of shared >> libraries. Daniel> I disagree. Valid standards should be enforced. Providing Daniel> compatibilty just keeps more and more non-compliant pieces of Daniel> code around. The earlier authors and maintainers are forced to Daniel> update their software to be standard-compliant the better. Daniel> Even if it's painful and apparently unnecessary work for the Daniel> moment. It is beneficial in the long run. Daniel> This is just my general opinion on such things. Well... there's a time and a place for this. To be mainstream, we need to consider that compatibility is what attracts most people. In this case, it appears that someone was coding to an earlier standard ... not just hacking something together. The _real_ problem here is incompatible langauge changes ... leading me to loose yet more faith in C++ as a whole. Daniel> In your particular case, maybe you could add a copy of Daniel> strstream.h as a patch to the port into the build directory Daniel> and reference it as "strstream.h" instead of . Daniel> Thus the system libstdc++ headers do not need to be polluted. Finally a helpful idea I hadn't explored yet, thank-you. Dave. -- ============================================================================ |David Gilbert, Independent Contractor. | Two things can only be | |Mail: dave@daveg.ca | equal if and only if they | |http://daveg.ca | are precisely opposite. | =========================================================GLO================