From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gabriel Dos Reis <Gabriel.Dos-Reis@cmla.ens-cachan.fr>
To: pme@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: libstdc++/3016: stl_queue.h bugs wrt compliance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 07:46:00 -0000
Message-id: <20010605144602.27694.qmail@sourceware.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-06/msg00126.html
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/3016; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Gabriel Dos Reis <Gabriel.Dos-Reis@cmla.ens-cachan.fr>
To: Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com>
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: libstdc++/3016: stl_queue.h bugs wrt compliance
Date: 05 Jun 2001 16:33:27 +0200

 Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com> writes:
 
 | The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/3016; it has been noted by GNATS.
 | 
 | From: Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com>
 | To: brendan@zen.org
 | Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
 | Subject: Re: libstdc++/3016: stl_queue.h bugs wrt compliance
 | Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 16:49:10 -0400
 | 
 |  On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 09:50:54PM -0000, brendan@zen.org wrote:
 |  > *************** protected:
 |  > *** 76,81 ****
 |  >     _Sequence c;
 |  >   public:
 |  > !   queue() : c() {}
 |  > !   explicit queue(const _Sequence& __c) : c(__c) {}
 |  >   
 |  >     bool empty() const { return c.empty(); }
 |  > --- 76,80 ----
 |  >     _Sequence c;
 |  >   public:
 |  > !   explicit queue(const _Sequence& __c = _Sequence()) : c(__c) {}
 |  >   
 |  >     bool empty() const { return c.empty(); }
 |  
 |  I disagree with removing the copy ctor.  Just because it isn't
 |  mandated doesn't mean it isn't allowed.
 
 Hmm, I'm amused by this reasoning because "standard conformance" was
 claimed in order to ditch the previous code.  Now, suddenly, the same
 reasoning no longer applies for other parts.
 
 -- Gaby