From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin Sebor To: lerdsuwa@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/186 Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 12:06:00 -0000 Message-id: <20010526190601.28053.qmail@sourceware.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-05/msg00869.html List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/186; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Martin Sebor To: lerdsuwa@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/186 Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 13:04:49 -0600 lerdsuwa@gcc.gnu.org wrote: > > The following reply was made to PR c++/186; it has been noted by GNATS. > > From: lerdsuwa@gcc.gnu.org > To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, heiko.goller@gmx.net, lerdsuwa@gcc.gnu.org, > martin@loewis.home.cs.tu-berlin.de, nobody@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: > Subject: Re: c++/186 > Date: 26 May 2001 07:37:59 -0000 > > Synopsis: bug report: explicit template instantiation > > Responsible-Changed-From-To: unassigned->lerdsuwa > Responsible-Changed-By: lerdsuwa > Responsible-Changed-When: Sat May 26 00:37:59 2001 > Responsible-Changed-Why: > Patch submitted. The code is illegal though as the template > specialization string_char_traits already exists in > . Yes, although core issue 259 will make it legal (if accepted). See http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#259 I think gcc should implement the proposed resolution and perhaps warn in -pedantic mode until the former has been incorporated into the standard. Regards Martin