On 2 July 2012 18:24, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> I'd like to see inline namespaces used so that in C++11 mode std::list >> refers to (for example) std::__2011::list, which has the additional >> member. That wouldn't link to C++03's std::list. > > That means that C++03 std::list cannot interface with C++11 std::list > even within the v6 ABI, right?
Right. > That sounds not very much better > than the broken ABI we have right now (unless you suggest people > that want the C++11 std::list would have to use std::__2011::list and > otherwise would get the C++03 std::list even with -std=c++11?). No, I mean that with -std=c++11 there would be no 'list' declared in namespace std. The name 'std::list' would refer to the 'list' in the inline namespace 'std::__2011' which would be mangled differently.
