site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev@lists.apple.com Any further enlightenment is welcome. On 15/01/2005, at 0:20, Clark Cox wrote: They're not really changes to the language, the language was already defined that way. The changes to the compiler are to bring it more into line with how the language was defined all along. IOW, the way that GCC did things before was broken -- they've just fixed it. ye gads, that's horrible. What were they thinking when they spec'ed those templating changes? (that's a serious question- anyone got an article on the philosophy behind the language changes? they disgust me at first glance.) On 14/01/2005, at 11:04, Andrew Pinski wrote: On Jan 13, 2005, at 7:58 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: On Jan 13, 2005, at 7:53 PM, Sam Vaughan wrote: Yes it is expected, this was a bad extension to C which was removed. You can read the release notes for gcc 4.0.0 at <http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/changes.html>. You might also want to read the 3.4.0 release notes: <http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.4/changes.html> as the C++ front-end has changed a lot too. -- Pinski _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.appl... I thought they were changes to the compiler, to bring it in line with (not-quite-as-recent) changes to the language? Has it always been this way? It seems rather odd to change from a good syntax which is fairly standardised, to a poor syntax which wasn't used anyway. :) On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:00:02 +1000, Chris Bergmann <ceebers@mac.com> wrote: It appears that gcc 4 has an issue with casting lvalues: Is this expected behaviour? I might have a lot of code to change... This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com