From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.com>
To: law@cygnus.com
Cc: egcs@cygnus.com, drepper@cygnus.com, jason@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: New STL & egcs
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 08:45:00 -0000
Message-id: <199807091455.HAA04686@atrus.synopsys.com>
References: <14102.899952980@hurl.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 1998-07/msg00347.html

Jeff writes:

> BTW, I should have mentioned  that I'm considering running egcs-1.2
> off the same branch as egcs-1.1.
> 
> ie, we go through the egcs-1.1 release cycle, possibly making a few
> minor releases as we deem it necessary.
> 
> Then we add the new STL code (and only the new STL code) to the release
> branch and start the egcs-1.2 cycle.

The SGI STL v3.1 has code that conflicts with existing libstdc++ code
in at least two places: the string class, and the exception classes.
Both SGI and the existing libstdc++ provide versions.  The SGI string
class is superior in that it conforms to the standard and our existing
class does not.

To properly make these decisions we need to know more about the status
of the replacement libstdc++.  Can Ulrich Drepper or Jason Merrill comment
about the status?  When will a version be available for testing?  If you
want to keep it private, should we use the SGI string class or not?

(I'm for dropping the existing string and using the SGI one).