From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Buck To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/3628: "using std::rel_ops" blows up std::vector Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:06:00 -0000 Message-id: <20010710160600.23951.qmail@sourceware.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00272.html List-Id: The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/3628; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Joe Buck To: Richard.Kreckel@ginac.de Cc: Gabriel.Dos-Reis@cmla.ens-cachan.fr (Gabriel Dos Reis), gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/3628: "using std::rel_ops" blows up std::vector Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:58:31 -0700 (PDT) > On 10 Jul 2001, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > [...] > > The mere fact > > that they were sequestred in a separate namespace should be an > > indication that they were a mistake. > [...] > > in this particular case, it is well known > > that they were a mistake. > > Message understood. Just one final question: Do you have any pointers > where I can read more about this "consensus" that they were a mistake? Probably not, because there is no such consensus. I, for one, do not think that they are a mistake at all, especially since they are now segregated into the optional rel_ops namespace, and the software I develop tends to use them heavily. This software runs smoothly on at least five different C++ compilers; only gcc-3.0 needs workarounds.