Thanks for the kindly reply!
> Why is mytest in the global namespace?
I'm a C++ newbie, and still not used to put everything into a
namespace. Sorry to bother...
> We try to avoid extensions in gcc, you may want to propose this to the C++
> standard committee first. However, you should first
Agree!
I will put my definitions into a namespace as you suggested.
Jonathan Wakely 于2020年1月15日周三 下午11:42写道：
>
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 15:37, Jiang Ma wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the kindly reply!
> > > It would create a non-standard, non-portable dialect of C++. We prefer
> > > to avoid adding
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 15:37, Jiang Ma wrote:
>
> Thanks for the kindly reply!
> > It would create a non-standard, non-portable dialect of C++. We prefer
> > to avoid adding non-standard extensions these days. You could propose
> >it to the C++ committee, but I'm pretty sure they would not want
Thanks for the kindly reply!
> It would create a non-standard, non-portable dialect of C++. We prefer
> to avoid adding non-standard extensions these days. You could propose
>it to the C++ committee, but I'm pretty sure they would not want such
>a thing.
Indeed, pragma is not portable. I
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 08:15, 马江 wrote:
>
> Hello,
> After some google, I find there is no way to control the scope of
> "using" for the moment. This seems strange as we definitely need this
> feature especially when writing inline member functions in c++
> headers.
>
> Currently I am
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020, 马江 wrote:
Hello,
After some google, I find there is no way to control the scope of
"using" for the moment. This seems strange as we definitely need this
feature especially when writing inline member functions in c++
headers.
Currently I am trying to build a simple
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 3:15 AM 马江 wrote:
>
> Hello,
> After some google, I find there is no way to control the scope of
> "using" for the moment. This seems strange as we definitely need this
> feature especially when writing inline member functions in c++
> headers.
>
> Currently I am
