From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32001 invoked by alias); 26 Oct 2005 12:37:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 31985 invoked by uid 48); 26 Oct 2005 12:37:14 -0000 Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:37:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20051026123714.31983.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug libstdc++/24537] Non-uglified names inside namespace __gnu_cxx In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pcarlini at suse dot de" X-SW-Source: 2005-10/txt/msg03429.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-10-26 12:37 ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Seems like to me, this is what namespaces are for anyways? and non-uglified > names are correct, maybe it needs to be a different namespace like > __gnu_cxx::__implemenation instead which seems like the more correct thing to > do than uglify names. I think this is what Boost does too. Indeed, the idea is using namespaces. But seems much more clean to me using separate namespaces, not nested ones, for our problem: __gnu_cxx for new extensions and __gnu_legacy for legacy extensions. The implementation proper bits are instead already inside __gnu_internal. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24537