https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31464
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
C++ Modules will (we hope) provide a better solution to this problem.
Adding non-standard and non-portable headers will only make vendor lock-in more
likely, as well as being a maintenance burden. It's three days since I fixed a
bug in <bits/memoryfwd.h> caused by inconsistent forward declarations that
didn't match the real definitions. If we did it for the entire library, we'd
make such mistakes more often.
Given the position above, and that there has been no movement on this in 14
years, I don't think there is any benefit to keeping it open.
