Re: [Lpr-discuss] snmpkit for gcc 3.0 BETTER

[Ben W. <be...@va...>]

> 
> 
> hi
> 
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 09:47:41AM -0700, Ben Woodard wrote:
> > 
> > I appriciate all the work that you did to make this work with gcc 3.0.
> > Maybe I don't fully understand the problem but it seems to me that the
> > problem you are having is with the standard namespace.
> > 
> > This code was written before standard C++ really was widely deployed
> > but converting it to work with the new standard shouldn't be as hard
> > as your patch and script seem to make it. 
> > 
> > Why can't we just insert a few:
> > 
> > using std::string;
> > using std::basic_string;
> > using std::deque;
> > ...
> >
> 
> (actually this is what I did in the first place, but then I received a
> Debian bug)
> you can't, because this is a library; if you do so, you force
> this behaviour on each and every package that will use this library
> (who has to include the headesr file from snmpkit; and maybe there is some
> problem with linking too, but I am not sure)
> 

So let me see if I understand this properly. I can't put this in the
header file because it forces other people who might use my library to
also accept the classes that I use into their default namespace. That
of course IS bad.

So the answer is to modify all the header files so that when I
reference a class in the std library I put a "std::" in front of
it. That is basically what your awk script does -- correct?

> then you have to patch all the include files, the way I did; and 
> this is what is proposed in the http page that I
> referenced in the original email
> 
> then I found it easier to just patch everything

The only thing that is a little unclear to me yet is why you sent an
awk script and mods to configure.in rather than just a patch which
fixed everything once and for all. Did you run into problems with
backward compatibility or something?

> 
> a.
> 
> 
> -- 
> A Mennucc
>  "? un mondo difficile. Che vita intensa!" (Renato Carotone)