Rob Weir sez: } On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 11:23:16AM -0500, Gregory Seidman wrote: } > I'm trying to determine whether flex++ produces standards-compliant } > C++. It seems that it very nearly does, except that } > /usr/include/FlexLexer.h refers to std::istream and std::ostream } > without the std:: prefix. This is as of 2.5.4a-30 (current unstable), } > however; 2.5.4a-29 was still using iostream.h. I downloaded 2.5.4a from } > ftp.gnu.org and its FlexLexer.h is still using iostream.h. } > } > Does this mean that only Debian's (unstable) version of flex++ is } > properly C++ compliant (and still not quite)? Will the changes get back } > into the primary branch? } } The Debian maintainer has probably already sent the patches upstream to } GNU; it probably has a slow release cycle though, which is why it hasn't } shown up yet.
Mm. I'm actually a little confused about this. At ftp.gnu.org, flex is in the non-gnu directory. I think that means that it is part of the GNU project, but not maintained by them. Or maybe the reverse. I'm not sure. } > My motivation here is to be able to document which version of flex++ } > some software requires. Right now I can use any version, but I have my } > own flex.skl and FlexLexer.h which are heavily modified. I'd rather be } > able to document a reliance on an authoritative version. } } If you've managed to get full ISO C++ compliance working, then send your } patch to both the Debian maintainer and GNU, they will love you for it :) It's absurdly easy, and doesn't require modifying flex's code at all. FlexLexer.h needs to include iosfwd instead of iostream.h, then sed 's/[io]stream/std::&/g'. The flex.skl needs to replace #include <iostream.h> with #include <iostream> using namespace std; I'm pretty appalled this hasn't been done yet. The real problem back when I made my own modified version was that FlexLexer.h forward declared istream and ostream as classes, when they are (now) really typedefs of specialized basic_istream and basic_ostream. They have at least fixed that so that flex 2.5.4 merely causes g++ 3.2 to complain bitterly about using backward compatibility headers. I think I may be able to document that 2.5.4 or higher is required, even with warnings. As for why I haven't submitted the patch, there are two reasons: 1) there's no clear process to do so, and 2) it's so utterly trivial. If you or anyone else would like to do what I described above and send the patch to the appropriate people, you are more than welcome to. Don't even feel obligated to mention my name. } -- Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> } http://ertius.org/ --Greg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
