IMHO it is already complex on this point. Can some explain to me why calling method foo<UInt8>() is any better/faster than calling fooUInt8()? (my C++ is not the greatest) This seems like a place where it "was cool" to use templates, but it didn't help with readability or speed. I could be wrong on the speed. I'm not too great with templates, but my college is and he said "he had never seen templates used like this, and does that even compile?"
If it was done for some significant speed increase cool, just note the gcc3.3 on mac will not work. Otherwise, you could just change it back to the way it used to be with three method names instead one regular method and two templated version. Congrats to everyone on the release btw. Who is in charge with building for OS X? If there is documentation somewhere, I'd love to try and package it up for OS X. /Shawn On 4/4/07, Stéphane Magnenat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 03 April 2007 21:49:29 Kai Antweiler wrote: > > After a little more testing, I found that this all compiles fine on my > > gentoo box, using gcc 3.2,3.3,3.4.6. > > The way you are using templates does compile on OS X gcc 4.0, but not > > 3.3. Could this be an OS X version of gcc issue? > > Ok, then I'd say we release now without changing the code, but put > your experience into our wiki. > And we'll clean things up for the next release but one. We should take care not to complexify correct code to fit old compiler bugs. Steph -- http://nct.ysagoon.com _______________________________________________ glob2-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/glob2-devel
_______________________________________________ glob2-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/glob2-devel
