From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun May 11 12:47:52 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA10552
          for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 11 May 1997 12:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA10547
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Sun, 11 May 1997 12:47:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rover.village.org [127.0.0.1] 
	by rover.village.org with esmtp (Exim 1.60 #1)
	id 0wQeZl-00032w-00; Sun, 11 May 1997 13:46:33 -0600
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Subject: Re: g++ shared library segfaults 
Cc: hasty@rah.star-gate.com (Amancio Hasty), moore@WOLFENET.com,
        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 09 May 1997 17:46:24 PDT."
		<199705100046.RAA01368@phaeton.artisoft.com> 
References: <199705100046.RAA01368@phaeton.artisoft.com>  
Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 13:46:32 -0600
From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Message-Id: <E0wQeZl-00032w-00@rover.village.org>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

In message <199705100046.RAA01368@phaeton.artisoft.com> Terry Lambert writes:
: For what it's worth, MSCVC++ and Borland C++ and Oregon C++ all have
: this same "compiler bug".  Are you *sure* about the determination of
: scope?

I am *POSITIVE* about it.  It was definitely in the Oct 95 draft
standard, which I've sense recycled.

Warner