Grrr .. why is C++ syntax so completely bad that most compilers
cannot get it right??? Stupid committee trying to avoid extra keywords...
This works with gcc 4.2.1 and with clang 3.3:
((::std::string*)(&tmp))->::std::basic_string<char>::~basic_string<char>();
but not with:
g++ (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.3-1ubuntu5) 4.6.3
Instead I get this:
/home/skaller/.felix/cache/text/home/skaller/felix/build/release/tools/flx_grep.cpp:
In function ‘size_t RE2_decoder(void*, char*, size_t)’:
/home/skaller/.felix/cache/text/home/skaller/felix/build/release/tools/flx_grep.cpp:24:77:
error: expected class-name before ‘(’ token
The funny thing is that the template:
template<class T> void destroy (T *p) { p->~U; }
usage:
destroy<string>();
always works. Isn't there a standard template for that?
Anyone know what the proper C++ syntax is?
--
john skaller
skal...@users.sourceforge.net
http://felix-lang.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
_______________________________________________
Felix-language mailing list
Felix-language@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/felix-language
