Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/04/16/21:05:26
Andrew Crabtree wrote in message <6h5tcg$p9$1 AT rosenews DOT rose DOT hp DOT com>...
>What was suspicious about it? Nobody has ever tried using the borland style
>template
>removal because it was never advertised as working.
Huh?
Info gcc, then look at C++ extensions and then template instantiation. Read
about halfway down, it says ..."code written for the Borland model should work
as-is"... with just a slowdown because template instances are recompiled in
each file where they're used.
>I'll take a look at the -fno-implicit-template problem as time permits. I
>suspect you'd get more help if you didn't come off as expecting service and
>support from volunteer projects.
That isn't what is annoying me. What is annoying me is how certain seemingly
critical features are made available only on certain platforms that are
preferentially treated, and the documentations all either imply or overtly say
otherwise! I don't like being told "If you really want to write software that
uses ropes of chars in two different source files, you and everyone who might
want to use this software has to throw away DOS, Windows, and the entire
installed base for these platforms and get Linux or FreeBSD. Or shell out the
$$$ for a Microsoft product that won't be able to write portable code, or even
DOS code, and will mean that ONLY users with DOS, WIndows, etc can use your
software. And you sure as heck can't write code that will be compilable and
runnable on both DOS and Linux unless you keep your rope<char> to one
sourcefile only."
--
.*. "Clouds are not spheres, mountains are not cones, coastlines are not
-() < circles, and bark is not smooth, nor does lightning travel in a
`*' straight line." ------------------------------------------------
-- B. Mandelbrot | Paul Derbyshire (PGD) ao950 AT freenet DOT carleton DOT ca
______________________ ____|_____________ pderbysh AT usa DOT net
Programmer & Humanist | ICQ: 10423848 | http://chat.carleton.ca/~pderbysh
- Raw text -