Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/02/07/14:32:57

From: Silver <SilverBanana AT gmx DOT de>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Is there a newer version than 2.95.2
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 18:25:17 +0100
Organization: Private
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <>
References: <3A817101 DOT 3106B5A9 AT gmx DOT de> <95ru6a$leo$1 AT nnrp1 DOT deja DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: 981566649 07 4129 smbuhZSSFYmSI 010207 17:24:09
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT t-online DOT com
X-Sender: 320061326503-0001 AT t-dialin DOT net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Tom St Denis wrote:
> In article <3A817101 DOT 3106B5A9 AT gmx DOT de>,
>   SilverBanana AT gmx DOT de wrote:
> > I'd like to ask if there is somewhere an newer experimental version of
> > DJGPP like 2.96 or 2.97. If so where can it be found?
> If you peek at the CVS trees you can get the latest, why did you find a
> problem with 2.95.2?
> offers an interface to a
brand new version of GCC. It compiled this source without trouble:

template <class TTempClass1, TTempClass1 m1>
class TClass1
void func1()

template <class TTempClass2>
void func2(TClass1<TTempClass2, 3> c1)

int main()
TClass1<int,3> a;

Gcc 2.95.2 keeps telling me that templates in paramters (or something
like that) is not yet implemented. Gcc 2.97 seems to have this feature.

- Raw text -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019