Re: linux libio solution

[Robert Wilhelm <robert@physiol.med.tu-muenchen.de>]

> "Harm"?  You don't know what you're talking about, or at the
> least are using very poorly chosen words.  "Harm" implies a
> misfeature that hurts users.  Mixing stdio/iostream is a
> win for users.  But, by definition, if the stdio and iostream
> implementation are tied together, it will complicate trying
> to update one without the other.  We are discussing whether it
> OK to require users to update one if they update the other, or
> if we could/should work out a way so they can only update iostream
> without updating stdio.  It is a wild leap to suggest that it is
> "harmful" that they are tied together.
>

Sorry if this was the wrong word. I am no native english speaker.

All I wanted to express is that the mixed stdio/iostream
on linux has caused problems in the past and I think
an implementation, where libc and libstd++ are not
tied so strong together, would be a win.


On all supported commercial platforms it is possible to
install a new g++/libg++ without changing libc.

Only on linux that is not possible. 
You are always forced to upgrade libc.
Upgrading libc even between minor levels has
caused much problems in the past.
All libg++ releases did not work unmodified for Linux.