Re: [PATCH] Choose syntax



On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 02:20:10PM +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
> Though it didn't become clear from his posts which part of the
> construct causes the compiler to barf
>
the declaration of constants. the const keyword as an attribute to
pointers is "new" as well, but supported by most compilers for two
decades or something, basically since it came up in c++. however, const
variables (which tend to occupy no space if no address of them is used)
is a relatively new concept (also coming from c++), and i remember a
recent (well, 1-2 years) case we had in kde where some (c++) compiler
did not get a construct with const right. unfortunately i forgot the
details.

> neither which compiler versions do not grok it.
>
because i don't know exactly. these are just random memories from
reading autoconf manuals, source codes, mailing lists, stuff, you know.

> I guess these must be fairly old compiler systems,
>
that might well be.

after all i think it won't hurt if we go with the cleaner approach.
i suppose somebody will complain if it does not work. :)

-- 
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
--
Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]