From owner-freebsd-chat  Sun Nov 19 08:19:16 1995
Return-Path: owner-chat
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id IAA08942
          for chat-outgoing; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 08:19:16 -0800
Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (rocky.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.10])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id IAA08937
          for <FreeBSD-chat@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 08:19:13 -0800
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA16061; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 09:21:25 -0700
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 1995 09:21:25 -0700
From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net>
Message-Id: <199511191621.JAA16061@rocky.sri.MT.net>
To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr>
Cc: chuckr@glue.umd.edu (Chuck Robey), FreeBSD-chat@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Gcc-2.7.1
In-Reply-To: <199511191333.OAA01301@keltia.freenix.fr>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951118215139.9575A-100000@mocha.eng.umd.edu>
	<199511191333.OAA01301@keltia.freenix.fr>
Sender: owner-chat@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

[ 2.7.1 bug-fixes ]

> I don't recall either  but I know that  C++  was broken (try  running groff
> compiled with 2.7.0 !).

Nope.  Groff is broken with regards to newer c++ releases because it
relies on an older revision of the standard.  You can compile groff by
telling it to use the older standard with a flag.

It has to do with:
{
    for (int i=0; i++; i < 10)
       printf("%d ", i);
    printf("%d\n", i);

In the older standard, 'i' was in scope in the final printf, but the
newer standard says that 'i' is only in scope within the for loop.



Nate