This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
> > >>>>> "Jeffrey" == Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com> writes: > > Jeffrey> I've got conflicting reports from Jason and Alexandre > Jeffrey> about this one. I need a definitive answer before I wake > Jeffrey> up in the morning or it will not be in gcc-2.95. > > Both Jason and Alexandre are right. > > The code is indeed buggy: > > [except.spec] > > If any declaration of a function has an exception-specification, all > declarations, including the definition and an explicit specialization, > of that function shall have an exception-specification with the same > set of type-ids. > > It couldn't be any clearer. > > If autoconf is generating the code fragment H.J. shows, then autoconf > is broken. > > However, the patch should still go on the branch. After all, autoconf > is in widespread use. There is no non-conformance issue here since we > will still warn if -pedantic. > > H.J., please follow up with whatever tool is producing this bogus > code, and get that tool fixed. In the next major version, we should > It is ncurses 4.2. However, I believe the problem is in autoconf and I don't even know if there is a reasonable fix for autoconf since it may not know which one, extern "C" void exit(int); extern "C" void exit(int) throw (); to use for a given system. gcc 2.95 works with #include <stdlib.h> extern "C" void exit(int); but not extern "C" void exit(int); #include <stdlib.h> I don't see any reason to allow one and not the other. H.J.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |