> > On Oct 25, 2005, at 7:44 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > But this is not an extension at all. This is an implementation > > defined > > behavior which is different than what an extension would do. > > > > People depending on this is not the correct thing do any ways as > > there could be another compiler besides which GCC which does this. > > <nod> I'm not disagreeing with anything you're saying. My only > point is that it might be in gcc's best interest to have the same > implementation defined behavior as MS, EDG-based compilers and > CodeWarrior when that is a reasonable choice (and probably others, I > know my list of compilers is incomplete).
Why not get other compilers to change to what GCC does? Why does GCC have to follow what other compilers do, maybe other compilers would be in the best interest of following what GCC does. Why not instead get the standard changed and then GCC will just follow then (and really should only follow at that point)? (and Yes I know you wrote the MW C++ library and part of the C++ standards comittee). -- Pinski
