From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14415 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2006 11:20:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 14330 invoked by uid 48); 19 Apr 2006 11:19:56 -0000 Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:20:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060419111956.14329.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug libstdc++/6257] C-library symbols enter global namespace In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pcarlini at suse dot de" 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 X-SW-Source: 2006-04/txt/msg01518.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #20 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-04-19 11:19 ------- (In reply to comment #19) > (In reply to comment #18) > > Probably this PR should be suspended, while waiting for the resolution of DR > > 456: > > > > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#456 > > Whether the situation remains the same or the g++ implementation becomes legal > does not change the fact that... I disagree, for many reasons. The issue is more complex, really. For instance - assuming of course the current implementation becomes completely legal - then changing the behavior for some targets and not for others, implies that the very same source code would not be be portable across those targets. I don't think we would like that. Besides, more generally, I'm not at all sure that all the users would actually *like* the new behavior. Indeed, to my best knowldege some implementations which, in principle, could rather easily implement the current standard mandated behavior (for many reasons, for instance are targeting only a small set of systems) decided to *not* implement it by default, on purpose. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6257