Re: problems with g++-4.1

Brendan O'Dea writes: > On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 03:44:46PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > >* Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-08 14:50]: > >> Martin, maybe we can add a workaround in the Perl headers instead? > > > >I'm sure bod could just remove the use of 'register' for a while. > >

Re: problems with g++-4.1

Brendan O'Dea writes: > On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 03:44:46PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > >* Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-08 14:50]: > >> Martin, maybe we can add a workaround in the Perl headers instead? > > > >I'm sure bod could just remove the use of 'register' for a while. > >

Re: problems with g++-4.1

On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 03:44:46PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: >* Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-08 14:50]: >> Martin, maybe we can add a workaround in the Perl headers instead? > >I'm sure bod could just remove the use of 'register' for a while. Sure I can, but... I've just teste

Re: problems with g++-4.1

* Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-08 14:50]: > Martin, maybe we can add a workaround in the Perl headers instead? I'm sure bod could just remove the use of 'register' for a while. -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subjec

Re: problems with g++-4.1

Alex Romosan writes: > this program: > > #include > #include > > struct A { > void* operator new(size_t alloc_size) { > printf("A::operator new()\n"); > return malloc(alloc_size); > }; > > void operator delete(void* p, size_t s) { > p

problems with g++-4.1

this program: #include #include struct A { void* operator new(size_t alloc_size) { printf("A::operator new()\n"); return malloc(alloc_size); }; void operator delete(void* p, size_t s) { printf("A::delete %d\n", s); }; A(