Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 14 Sep 2000 08:30:32 -0500
From:      "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com>
To:        archie@whistle.com
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org, John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>
Subject:   Re: c++ error
Message-ID:  <20000914083032.B16624@spawn.nectar.com>
In-Reply-To: <20000913230227.A15302@spawn.nectar.com>; from n@nectar.com on Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 11:02:28PM -0500
References:  <200009140019.RAA04988@bubba.whistle.com> <200009140036.RAA01292@vashon.polstra.com> <20000913230227.A15302@spawn.nectar.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 11:02:28PM -0500, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
> Please see PR bin/13383 before doing anything like this.  It addresses
> a similar situation.  I'll comment more tomorrow after some sleep :-)

I knew I needed some sleep. It ``addressess'' the exact same situation.
In summary, gcc has a kluge to work around a bug in the C++ standard.
It looks like you and Justin have both found edge cases where the gcc
kluge loses.  If you can come up with a reasonable test case that
reproduces the problem, perhaps it can be PR'd to the GCC folks?

As per the PR, I'm against #ifdef'ing structures like ip_opts for C++,
since it is likely that a later C++ standard will be corrected.
-- 
Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000914083032.B16624>