1) I cannot use STLport's IOStreams since I don't have control over the
entire application... this would prevent the ability to communicate with
streams to 3rd party components that are built using the native streams
implementation.
2) I like your second suggestion the best... I ran into a situation in the
past where someone defined "std" to be nothing as a porting method and
got it wrong... it affected all code (including the system headers) and was
a real pain to track down...
Thanks,
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Don McClimans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 8:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Building Xalan 1.2 on HP/UX with aCC A.03.33 and STLport
4.5
John Bossom wrote:
> the XALAN_CLASSIC_IOSTREAMS only controls which headers are included.
> (i.e. <blah.h> vs <blah>)
>
> The application of the namespace "std" is still controlled by a single
> macro, XALAN_NO_STD_NAMESPACE whether it be IO classes or STL container
> classes.
.... <long quoting snipped> ...
Can you just use the STLPort IOStreams, instead of the OS's IOStreams? STLPort IOStreams is quite robust, in my experience. That would put everything into the std namespace.
Alternatively, you can compile STLPort so everything is in the global namespace, as I recall. That would put everything into the global namespace.
As a last resort, you could define a macro "std" that resolves to nothing. Long ago I did this with STLPort (ver 3.something, as I recall), and it worked. It might be worth a try.
Don McClimans
This message may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error or are not the intended recipient, you may not use, copy, disseminate or distribute it; do not open any attachments, delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by e-mail that you have done so. Thank you.
