On Tue, Dec 29, 1998 at 08:21:43PM +0100, Wojciech Zabolotny wrote:
Hi All
I've stated that there is no old good String class in libstdc++.
Instead I've found the string header which defines the string class.
Is it OK to use it in new C++ programs, or it is added only for
compatibility? Why
On Tue, 29 Dec 1998, Wojciech Zabolotny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've stated that there is no old good String class in libstdc++.
Instead I've found the string header which defines the string class.
Is it OK to use it in new C++ programs, or it is added only for
compatibility? Why has it such
On Tue, 29 Dec 1998, Wojciech Zabolotny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've stated that there is no old good String class in libstdc++.
Instead I've found the string header which defines the string
class. Is it OK to use it in new C++ programs, or it is added only
for compatibility? [...]
Hi All
I've stated that there is no old good String class in libstdc++.
Instead I've found the string header which defines the string class.
Is it OK to use it in new C++ programs, or it is added only for
compatibility? Why has it such nonstandard name (without .h suffix).
On Tue, Dec 29, 1998 at 20:21:43 +0100, Wojciech Zabolotny wrote:
I've stated that there is no old good String class in libstdc++.
String was a GNU extension; if you have code that still uses it, install
the libg++ packages.
Instead I've found the string header which defines the string class.
5 matches
Mail list logo