On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 15:49 -0700, Joe Buck wrote: > People that put out distributions are rightly irritated when we pull stuff > like this. It's not even good enough to change "ext" to "backward", now > you need an autoconf test to find the fine header, so your program > compiles with both older and newer gcc's.
So what? I have a binding for gcc hash containers. I *knew* when I created it what the status was. You can bet it is annoying having to use a configuration time test (I wouldn't touch autoconf with a barge pole..), but that is the price for tracking non-standard but desirable or optional features. I should point out retaining 'old' features can create a significant maintenance burden for gcc developers, and as such reduce the quality of the current and future implementations. -- John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net> Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net
