On Tuesday, 18 December 2012 at 16:47:37 UTC, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On Tuesday, 18 December 2012 at 16:43:53 UTC, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On Tuesday, 18 December 2012 at 15:19:58 UTC, Iain Buclaw
wrote:
Should we take this as an opportunity for other compiler
maintainers to implement their own compiler-specific
predefined attributes?
Please, no!
Before anyone says "that would never happen", consider that
C++11 was forced to use 'decltype' instead of the more natual
'typeof' because GCC already added 'typeof' as an extension.
The same thing happened with the containers. GCC added
stdext::hash_map as an extension, so C++11 had to use the ugly
std::unordered_map (yep, even the different namespace didn't
help).
Can you explain why it was an issue in the unordered_map case ?
Because of using ?
I think this should be advertised that such a feature is in some
GDC's specific module, and that it can clash with any library
symbol at any time, as it is not a standardized feature of the
language.
