Re: libstdc++/1773: __cplusplus defined to 1, should be 199711L

Re: libstdc++/1773: __cplusplus defined to 1, should be 199711L

[Nathanael Nerode]

The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/1773; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>
To: bkoz@redhat.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, Jens.Maurer@gmx.net,
   gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gdr@gcc.gnu.org,
   pme@sourceware.cygnus.com, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: libstdc++/1773: __cplusplus defined to 1, should be 199711L
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:32:03 -0500

 This is a very old report.  What's the status now?  It was suspended because 
 the standard conforming value for __cplusplus broke libstdc++-v3 on many 
 platforms.  libstdc++-v3 and the C++ front end have both undergone dramatic 
 changes and improvements.  Can this be fixed now?
 
 --Nathanael

Re: libstdc++/1773: __cplusplus defined to 1, should be 199711L

[Benjamin Kosnik]

The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/1773; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com>
To: neroden@twcny.rr.com
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, Jens.Maurer@gmx.net, gcc@gcc.gnu.org,
   gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gdr@gcc.gnu.org, pme@sourceware.cygnus.com,
   gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: libstdc++/1773: __cplusplus defined to 1, should be 199711L
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:23:59 -0600

 On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:32:03 -0500
 Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
 
 >This is a very old report.  What's the status now?  It was suspended because 
 >the standard conforming value for __cplusplus broke libstdc++-v3 on many 
 >platforms.  libstdc++-v3 and the C++ front end have both undergone dramatic 
 >changes and improvements.  Can this be fixed now?
 
 Sadly, this can't be fixed at the moment, at least on most platforms.
 For cross compilers using newlib, this was fixed some time back with the
 --enable-headers=c work done at the time of the QNX port. That is not
 the default configuration, however.
 
 One of the things blocking this is hardware, ie real access to
 up-to-date sun hardware with sunpro tools so I can see what is going on.
 The other issue is time: I don't have enough of it, and this is
 something I consider a lower priority than other issues. There were some
 patches in glibc-2.3.x that went in that may allow a more elegant
 solution for linux, but that work is not finished.
 
 best,
 benjamin