Hi,
I was thinking of doing some general const cleanup in the (probably very few)
places that may need it (if any at all). I'm thinking of it w/o looking at
the code yet (just downloaded from CVS) so please forgive if it doesn't
directly apply.
What's the general karma of having something
Kuba Ober [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Hi,
| I was thinking of doing some general const cleanup in the (probably very few)
| places that may need it (if any at all). I'm thinking of it w/o looking at
| the code yet (just downloaded from CVS) so please forgive if it doesn't
| directly apply.
|
| What's the general karma of having something like
|
| const int blah = 123;
|
| in a header file, inside a namespace (or not)? As far as I take it,
| it's a
Do we have those in header files?
that is not good.
and if we had them it should be
int const blah = 123;
and it would still be
Kuba Ober [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| What's the general karma of having something like
|
| const int blah = 123;
|
| in a header file, inside a namespace (or not)? As far as I take it,
| it's a
Do we have those in header files?
that is not good.
and if we had them it should be
int
| Is there a practical difference between const int var and int const var ?
| Consider me dumb :(
Yes :-) Consistency.
extern int const blah; // in the header file
int const blah = 123; // in the source file
OK, gotcha. Thanks.
Kuba
Hi,
I was thinking of doing some general const cleanup in the (probably very few)
places that may need it (if any at all). I'm thinking of it w/o looking at
the code yet (just downloaded from CVS) so please forgive if it doesn't
directly apply.
What's the general karma of having something
Kuba Ober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Hi,
>
| I was thinking of doing some general const cleanup in the (probably very few)
| places that may need it (if any at all). I'm thinking of it w/o looking at
| the code yet (just downloaded from CVS) so please forgive if it doesn't
| directly apply.
> | What's the general karma of having something like
> |
> | const int blah = 123;
> |
> | in a header file, inside a namespace (or not)? As far as I take it,
> | it's a
>
> Do we have those in header files?
> that is not good.
> and if we had them it should be
> int const blah = 123;
> and it
Kuba Ober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> | What's the general karma of having something like
>> |
>> | const int blah = 123;
>> |
>> | in a header file, inside a namespace (or not)? As far as I take it,
>> | it's a
>>
>> Do we have those in header files?
>> that is not good.
>> and if we had them
> | Is there a practical difference between const int var and int const var ?
> | Consider me dumb :(
>
> Yes :-) Consistency.
>
> extern int const blah; // in the header file
>
> int const blah = 123; // in the source file
OK, gotcha. Thanks.
Kuba
Yves == Yves Bastide [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yves Here is a second patch for building 1.1.6fix with gcc 3.0. This
Yves one should be less bad :)
I applied it. Thanks.
JMarc
> "Yves" == Yves Bastide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yves> Here is a second patch for building 1.1.6fix with gcc 3.0. This
Yves> one should be less bad :)
I applied it. Thanks.
JMarc
Yves == Yves Bastide [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yves Here is a second patch for building 1.1.6fix with gcc 3.0. This
Yves one should be less bad :)
This looks very good to me. So, unless Lars objects, I'll apply it.
JMarc
> "Yves" == Yves Bastide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yves> Here is a second patch for building 1.1.6fix with gcc 3.0. This
Yves> one should be less bad :)
This looks very good to me. So, unless Lars objects, I'll apply it.
JMarc
On 07-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
I just fixed that... Jürgen added something to a file that he
shouldn't have...
I'll commit in a little bit.
Sorry you're right! Hopefully you can fix it for all of us.
Jürgen
--
Juergen Vigna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On 07-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| I just fixed that... Jürgen added something to a file that he
| shouldn't have...
|
| I'll commit in a little bit.
|
| Sorry you're right! Hopefully you can fix it for all of us.
If your
On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
If your --with-included-string does not work you have to tell the
errors.
Well the errors are easy. LString does not define __BASTRING__ and so the
BOOST_NO_LIMITS is not defined. As I don't have a limits on my RedHat 7.1
system the #include limits
Juergen Vigna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| If your --with-included-string does not work you have to tell the
| errors.
|
| Well the errors are easy. LString does not define __BASTRING__ and so the
| BOOST_NO_LIMITS is not defined. As I don't have
On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Juergen Vigna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| If your --with-included-string does not work you have to tell the
| errors.
|
| Well the errors are easy. LString does not define __BASTRING__ and so the
|
Juergen Vigna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| Juergen Vigna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| | On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| |
| | If your --with-included-string does not work you have to tell the
| | errors.
| |
| | Well the errors are
On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
And the end of the configure script there should be a
#ifndef HAVE_LIMITS
#define BOOST_NO_LIMITS
#endif
are you missing that?
Yes I'm missing this one! Shouldn't that be too in config.h.in? It's missing
there to!
| One more thing limits !=
Juergen Vigna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| And the end of the configure script there should be a
|
| #ifndef HAVE_LIMITS
| #define BOOST_NO_LIMITS
| #endif
|
| are you missing that?
|
| Yes I'm missing this one! Shouldn't that be too in
On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
hmm... autogen.sh should take care of this...
Well I more or less never run ./autogen.sh, I'll try if that helps!
Jürgen
--
-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._
Dr. Jürgen VignaE-Mail: [EMAIL
Yves == Yves Bastide [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yves Here's a patch; I finally didn't try to go and test the kde and
Yves gnome frontends, since the versions of the libraries I have are
Yves themselves to-be-cleaned.
I do not like much the lstring.h solution... How come the main branch
does not
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 04:36:10PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Yves == Yves Bastide [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yves Here's a patch; I finally didn't try to go and test the kde and
Yves gnome frontends, since the versions of the libraries I have are
Yves themselves to-be-cleaned.
I
Here is a second patch for building 1.1.6fix with gcc 3.0. This one
should be less bad :)
--
Yves
std-try2.patch.gz
On 07-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> I just fixed that... Jürgen added something to a file that he
> shouldn't have...
>
> I'll commit in a little bit.
Sorry you're right! Hopefully you can fix it for all of us.
Jürgen
--
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 07-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| > I just fixed that... Jürgen added something to a file that he
| > shouldn't have...
| >
| > I'll commit in a little bit.
|
| Sorry you're right! Hopefully you can fix it for all of us.
If your
On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> If your --with-included-string does not work you have to tell the
> errors.
Well the errors are easy. LString does not define __BASTRING__ and so the
BOOST_NO_LIMITS is not defined. As I don't have a on my RedHat 7.1
system the #include then fails!
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| > If your --with-included-string does not work you have to tell the
| > errors.
|
| Well the errors are easy. LString does not define __BASTRING__ and so the
| BOOST_NO_LIMITS is not defined. As I don't
On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>| On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>|
>| > If your --with-included-string does not work you have to tell the
>| > errors.
>|
>| Well the errors are easy. LString does not define __BASTRING__ and
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| >| On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| >|
| >| > If your --with-included-string does not work you have to tell the
| >| > errors.
| >|
| >| Well
On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> And the end of the configure script there should be a
>
>#ifndef HAVE_LIMITS
>#define BOOST_NO_LIMITS
>#endif
>
> are you missing that?
Yes I'm missing this one! Shouldn't that be too in config.h.in? It's missing
there to!
>| One more thing !=
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| > And the end of the configure script there should be a
| >
| >#ifndef HAVE_LIMITS
| >#define BOOST_NO_LIMITS
| >#endif
| >
| > are you missing that?
|
| Yes I'm missing this one! Shouldn't that be too
On 08-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> hmm... autogen.sh should take care of this...
Well I more or less never run ./autogen.sh, I'll try if that helps!
Jürgen
--
-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._
Dr. Jürgen VignaE-Mail: [EMAIL
> "Yves" == Yves Bastide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yves> Here's a patch; I finally didn't try to go and test the kde and
Yves> gnome frontends, since the versions of the libraries I have are
Yves> themselves to-be-cleaned.
I do not like much the lstring.h solution... How come the main
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 04:36:10PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Yves" == Yves Bastide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Yves> Here's a patch; I finally didn't try to go and test the kde and
> Yves> gnome frontends, since the versions of the libraries I have are
> Yves> themselves
Here is a second patch for building 1.1.6fix with gcc 3.0. This one
should be less bad :)
--
Yves
std-try2.patch.gz
It seems that another number of std:: or using std:: are needed to compile
LyX 1.1.6 with GCC 3.0 or other modern compilers.
I guess that, in .C files, the preferred way is to use
#ifndef CXX_GLOBAL_CSTD
using std::strlen;
...
#endif
But what about header files? Is The Right Thing, such as
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
| It seems that another number of std:: or using std:: are needed to compile
| LyX 1.1.6 with GCC 3.0 or other modern compilers.
|
| I guess that, in .C files, the preferred way is to use
|
| #ifndef CXX_GLOBAL_CSTD
| using std::strlen;
| ...
| #endif
|
) { - return width(s,
Yves strlen(s), f); + return width(s, std::strlen(s), f); } ///
Yves static
Yves acceptable for older compilers?
It will work for older gcc versions, but not for compaq cxx 6.2, which
understands namespaces but does not export C functions into std::
namespace
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:36:17PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Yves == Yves Bastide [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yves It seems that another number of std:: or using std:: are needed
Yves to compile LyX 1.1.6 with GCC 3.0 or other modern compilers.
Yes, a patch to do that would be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
| On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:36:17PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| Yves == Yves Bastide [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| Yves It seems that another number of std:: or using std:: are needed
| Yves to compile LyX 1.1.6 with GCC 3.0 or other
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 07:23:08PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
[about patches for gcc 3.0]
I wonder why you have to change anything at all... I am compilig with
gcc 3.0 all the and have commited all the changes I needed to
compile...
Are you
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 08:01:38PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
| On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 07:23:08PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
| [about patches for gcc 3.0]
|
| I wonder why you have to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
| On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 07:23:08PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
| [about patches for gcc 3.0]
|
| I wonder why you have to change anything at all... I am compilig with
| gcc 3.0 all the and have
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
devel...
and I figure you are taling bout the 1.1.6 branch... ok
--
Lgb
Today I get numerous errors in .../boost/detail
Here's a sample:
../../boost/boost/detail/limits.hpp:369: redefinition of `class
std::numeric_limitsfloat'
Garst R. Reese [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| devel...
|
| and I figure you are taling bout the 1.1.6 branch... ok
|
| --
| Lgb
| Today I get numerous errors in .../boost/detail
I just fixed that... Jürgen added something to a file that he
shouldn't
It seems that another number of std:: or using std:: are needed to compile
LyX 1.1.6 with GCC 3.0 or other modern compilers.
I guess that, in .C files, the preferred way is to use
#ifndef CXX_GLOBAL_CSTD
using std::strlen;
...
#endif
But what about header files? Is The Right Thing, such as
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
| It seems that another number of std:: or using std:: are needed to compile
| LyX 1.1.6 with GCC 3.0 or other modern compilers.
|
| I guess that, in .C files, the preferred way is to use
|
| #ifndef CXX_GLOBAL_CSTD
| using std::strlen;
| ...
| #endif
|
lyxfont { /// static int
Yves> width(char const * s, LyXFont const & f) { - return width(s,
Yves> strlen(s), f); + return width(s, std::strlen(s), f); } ///
Yves> static
Yves> acceptable for older compilers?
It will work for older gcc versions, but not for compaq cxx 6.2, w
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:36:17PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Yves" == Yves Bastide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Yves> It seems that another number of std:: or using std:: are needed
> Yves> to compile LyX 1.1.6 with GCC 3.0 or other modern compilers.
>
> Yes, a patch to do
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
| On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:36:17PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > > "Yves" == Yves Bastide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > Yves> It seems that another number of std:: or using std:: are needed
| > Yves> to compile LyX 1.1.6 with GCC 3.0
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 07:23:08PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
[about patches for gcc 3.0]
>
> I wonder why you have to change anything at all... I am compilig with
> gcc 3.0 all the and have commited all the changes I needed to
> compile...
Are
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 08:01:38PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
>
> | On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 07:23:08PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
> | [about patches for gcc 3.0]
> | >
> | > I wonder why you
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
| On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 07:23:08PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bastide) writes:
| [about patches for gcc 3.0]
| >
| > I wonder why you have to change anything at all... I am compilig with
| > gcc 3.0 all the and have
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> devel...
>
> and I figure you are taling bout the 1.1.6 branch... ok
>
> --
> Lgb
Today I get numerous errors in .../boost/detail
Here's a sample:
../../boost/boost/detail/limits.hpp:369: redefinition of `class
std::numeric_limits'
"Garst R. Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| > devel...
| >
| > and I figure you are taling bout the 1.1.6 branch... ok
| >
| > --
| > Lgb
| Today I get numerous errors in .../boost/detail
I just fixed that... Jürgen added something to a file that he
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 07:20:52PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjnnes wrote:
What I now need is a poll to see if anonymous namespaces are supported
on the different platforms.
So people please test:
namespace {
int foo() { return 1; }
}
int main() {
int i = foo
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 07:20:52PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> What I now need is a poll to see if anonymous namespaces are supported
> on the different platforms.
>
>
> So people please test:
>
>
> namespace {
>
> int foo() { return 1; }
>
>
On 15-Mar-2001 Lars Gullik Bjnnes wrote:
So people please test:
It compiles with RedHat7.0 (but you probably already knew:)
Jrgen
--
-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._
Dr. Jrgen VignaE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Italienallee 13/N Tel/Fax:
In math_cursor.C:48 (using std::cerr) I got cerr undefined with gcc-3.0
How std is std?
Garst
"Garst R. Reese" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| In math_cursor.C:48 (using std::cerr) I got cerr undefined with gcc-3.0
| How std is std?
very.
but we should not use cerr in code, that is taken care of by lyxerr.
Lgb
"Garst R. Reese" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| In math_cursor.C:48 (using std::cerr) I got cerr undefined with
| gcc-3.0
Probably because iostream is not included.
but I changed this to lyxerr.
Lgb
On 15-Mar-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> So people please test:
It compiles with RedHat7.0 (but you probably already knew:)
Jürgen
--
-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._
Dr. Jürgen VignaE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Italienallee 13/N
In math_cursor.C:48 (using std::cerr) I got cerr undefined with gcc-3.0
How std is std?
Garst
"Garst R. Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| In math_cursor.C:48 (using std::cerr) I got cerr undefined with gcc-3.0
| How std is std?
very.
but we should not use cerr in code, that is taken care of by lyxerr.
Lgb
"Garst R. Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| In math_cursor.C:48 (using std::cerr) I got cerr undefined with
| gcc-3.0
Probably because iostream is not included.
but I changed this to lyxerr.
Lgb
I am now removing all CXX...NAMESPACES stuff (of course I should have
let someone with an older compiler do this...), will commit that in a
few minutes.
What I now need is a poll to see if anonymous namespaces are supported
on the different platforms.
So people please test:
namespace {
int
What I now need is a poll to see if anonymous namespaces are supported
on the different platforms.
Supported in 2.95.2.
Andre'
--
Andr Pnitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Authentication-Warning: trylle.birdstep.com: larsbj set sender to lyx using -f
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: namespaces
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjnnes)
Organization: LyX Developer http://www.lyx.org/
Date: 15 Mar 2001 19:20:52 +0100
User-Agent: Gnus
I am now removing all CXX...NAMESPACES stuff (of course I should have
let someone with an older compiler do this...), will commit that in a
few minutes.
What I now need is a poll to see if anonymous namespaces are supported
on the different platforms.
So people please test:
namespace {
int
> What I now need is a poll to see if anonymous namespaces are supported
> on the different platforms.
Supported in 2.95.2.
Andre'
--
André Pönitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Authentication-Warning: trylle.birdstep.com: larsbj set sender to lyx using -f
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: namespaces
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes)
> Organization: LyX Deve
"Angus" == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Angus As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go
Angus through the header files (not the .C files) and remove code
Angus like:
Angus #ifdef SIGC_CXX_NAMESPACES using SigC::Object; #endif
If you are going to
On 14 Mar 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Angus" == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Angus As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go
Angus through the header files (not the .C files) and remove code
Angus like:
Angus #ifdef SIGC_CXX_N
John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On 14 Mar 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
|
| "Angus" == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| Angus As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go
| Angus through the header files (not the .C files) and remov
On Wednesday 14 March 2001 11:02, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Angus" == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Angus As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go
Angus through the header files (not the .C files) and remove code
Angus like:
Angus #ifdef
On 14 Mar 2001, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Look at the tests already used in configure.
Lgb
*doh*
another moron day for me I think :)
john
(where did I think CXX_WORKING_NAMESPACES came from ? :P )
--
"Never use a big word when a diminutive one would suffice.
Be more or less
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Wednesday 14 March 2001 11:02, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| "Angus" == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| Angus As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go
| Angus through the header files (not the
This will only make it harder to do the merge...
Lars Gullik Bjønnes! You mean it's going to happen? W!
Are you happy with things as they stand? Shall I make a patch of BRANCH_MVC's
current contents against HEAD and submit it to you?
I can easily undiff the changes I've made in my
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| This will only make it harder to do the merge...
|
| Lars Gullik Bjnnes! You mean it's going to happen? W!
Just give me some hours.
I want to have the compability code for minipages work first. (at
least I now know why it does not work)
I
On Wednesday 14 March 2001 12:25, Lars Gullik Bjnnes wrote:
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| This will only make it harder to do the merge...
|
| Lars Gullik Bjnnes! You mean it's going to happen? W!
Just give me some hours.
I want to have the compability code for
>>>>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go
Angus> through the header files (not the .C files) and remove code
Angus> like:
Angus> #ifdef SIGC_CXX_NAMESPAC
On 14 Mar 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Angus> As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go
> Angus> through the header files (not the
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 14 Mar 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
|
| > >>>>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > Angus> As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go
| > Angu
On Wednesday 14 March 2001 11:02, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Angus> As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go
> Angus> through the header files (not the
On 14 Mar 2001, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Look at the tests already used in configure.
>
> Lgb
*doh*
another moron day for me I think :)
john
(where did I think CXX_WORKING_NAMESPACES came from ? :P )
--
"Never use a big word when a diminutive one would suffice.
Be more or less
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Wednesday 14 March 2001 11:02, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > >>>>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > Angus> As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like
> This will only make it harder to do the merge...
Lars Gullik Bjønnes! You mean it's going to happen? W!
Are you happy with things as they stand? Shall I make a patch of BRANCH_MVC's
current contents against HEAD and submit it to you?
I can easily undiff the changes I've made in my
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > This will only make it harder to do the merge...
|
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes! You mean it's going to happen? W!
Just give me some hours.
I want to have the compability code for minipages work first. (at
least I now know why it does not work)
On Wednesday 14 March 2001 12:25, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | > This will only make it harder to do the merge...
> |
> | Lars Gullik Bjønnes! You mean it's going to happen? W!
>
> Just give me some hours.
>
> I want to have the
As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go through the header
files (not the .C files) and remove code like:
#ifdef SIGC_CXX_NAMESPACES
using SigC::Object;
#endif
Please object now!
Angus
As Lars says that namespaces are "GO, GO", I'd like to go through the header
files (not the .C files) and remove code like:
#ifdef SIGC_CXX_NAMESPACES
using SigC::Object;
#endif
Please object now!
Angus
On Wednesday 07 March 2001 18:08, Allan Rae wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
Does the fact that "boost::scoped_ptrs" etc are now appearing everywhere
mean
that we are now using namespaces officially and that I can write (for
example):
namespace frontends {
On Thursday 08 March 2001 09:37, Andre Poenitz wrote:
namespace citation {
class ControlCitation : public ControlCommand
Isn't one of the ideas of namespaces that instead of
citation::ControlCitation
citation::GUICitation
one could use shorter names like
citation
And if we're still in that interim
#ifdef CXX_HAS_NAMESPACES
namespace citation
#endif
Ok... if people use compilers without namespace support we'll certainly get
into trouble if we rely on them...
Question is: What compilers do people use and what features do these
compilers support?
In
n is: What compilers do people use and what features do
Andre these compilers support?
Basically gcc 2.8.x and egcs 1.0.x do not support namespaces. Dekel
and I used to compile with them, but we have upgraded now. So the
problem is just to know whether we want to support those compilers for
other peo
If we decide to do so, I can compile with gcc 2.8.1 from
time to time to check that it still works.
Having namespaces can be really nice... it took me a while to arrive at
this conclusion but I am a convinced "namespacer" by now...
Andre In the Linux world, I'd say 2.95 and later
"Andre" == Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andre Good idea... Would you do that?
Andre PS: Anybody betting how Lars would vote? ;-)
I guess the two questions are related. Let's see how Lars' ukase
on the question looks like.
JMarc
1 - 100 of 161 matches
Mail list logo
