From owner-freebsd-bugs Wed Oct 6 11:10: 4 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8941614CD3 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 1999 11:10:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) id LAA38524; Wed, 6 Oct 1999 11:10:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 11:10:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199910061810.LAA38524@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Jacques Vidrine Subject: Re: bin/13383 sys/netinet/in.h violates C++ spec. Reply-To: Jacques Vidrine Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR bin/13383; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Jacques Vidrine To: Thomas David Rivers Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, gibbs@narnia.plutotech.com Subject: Re: bin/13383 sys/netinet/in.h violates C++ spec. Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 13:02:39 -0500 On 6 October 1999 at 13:19, Thomas David Rivers wrote: > I think gcc 2.95.1 "improved" it's standards conformance. It is > now diagnosing errors previous versions didn't. > > Could that be the issue? No, see the text of this PR. To summarize: g++ version gives error 2.95 yes (according to Justin) 2.7.2.3 no (test case in PR) 2.91.66 no (test case in PR) 2.95.1 no (test case in PR) I don't have a position on which is CORRECT, but obviously the latter is more useful. Further, perhaps there is some confusion with regards to the compiler version Justin is using, or perhaps there is a test case that Justin has that produces the error. Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message