Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <08d401c1a2f4$d2d66370$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <20020122032839 DOT GA23746 AT redhat DOT com>
Subject: Re: gcc v3 issue -- hacky solution
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 14:28:12 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jan 2002 03:30:06.0196 (UTC) FILETIME=[15F21B40:01C1A2F5]


===
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 2:28 PM
Subject: gcc v3 issue -- hacky solution


> If we can generate new operators for all of the builtin types that are
> currently being used in setup.exe, then, if we compile everything with
> -fno-exceptions (which I've just added to Makefile.in) we won't have
to
> worry about having a mingw version of libstdc++.a around.
>
> It's a hack, I know, but the alternative of somehow building a mingw
> version of the stdc library is not too attractive.
>
> So, if anyone was looking for something, oh I don't know, repetitive
to
> do, that would be a good project, assuming that Robert agrees.
>
> (Unfortunately, my internal Robert simulator gives this about a 30%
chance of an
> agreement)

This external Robert simulator can confirm that, and drop it to about
10% :}.

I want to enable exceptions, to cleanup more of the code. I wouldn't be
stressed about haveing all the operators (surely there's a library
around already), but the no-exceptions clause won't fly without some
convincing.

Rob