Message-ID:	<391FA933.8131C54F@mtu-net.ru>
Date:	Mon, 15 May 2000 11:37:23 +0400
From:	"Alexei A. Frounze" <alex DOT fru AT mtu-net DOT ru>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language:	ru,en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: C++, complex, etc
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000515105224 DOT 9209M-100000 AT is>
X-Recipient:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 15 May 2000, Alexei A. Frounze wrote:
> 
> > I've found a strange solution...
> >
> > Now my rpogram looks like:
> > ------------8<-------------
> > #include <iostream.h>
> > #include <_Complex.h>
> 
> That's not a good solution: _Complex.h is a non-standard header from
> libg++ distribution.  The libg++ classes are deprecated and should not
> be used, especially in portable programs, as you yourself discovered:
> 
> > The source code is no more portable.
> >
> > Borland C/C++ doesn't have the "_Complex.h" header file and there is no
> > class with name "Complex" in "complex.h".
> >
> > Watcom C/C++ has no the "_Complex.h" header file but have a typedef that
> > makes "complex" the same as "Complex".
> 
> > Please explain me the purpose of these include/header files from the
> > "djgpp/lang/cxx" directory:
> 
> What do you need to know? <complex> defines the float_complex,
> double_complex, and long_double_complex types, <complex.h> is an alias
> for <complex> (kept for back-compatibility), and <_Complex.h>
> (originally Complex.h) is the libg++-specific header that defines the
> Complex type.

Does that mean that there is wrong information in all _3_ books about C++ I
have here? Only _1_ is about Borland C++, the rest _2_ don't assume any
particular C++ compiler.

-- 
Alexei A. Frounze
-----------------------------------------
Homepage: http://alexfru.chat.ru
Mirror:   http://members.xoom.com/alexfru

- Raw text -