Re: bison'd files don't compile under Microsoft VC++

[Hans Aberg]

At 09:18 -0800 2002/02/14, David Gluss wrote:
>You're espousing essentially the philosophy of HP...where programs
>have to have special defines to compile with usual practice, as opposed
>to what the standards bodies have defined.

I find it hard to follow your reasoning as you don't quote what you are
referring to.

The C++ standard ISO+IEC+14882-1998 has existed for a couple of years now,
and it defines these things.

Thus only the programs that do not adhere to usual practice (like evidently
your MS compiler for competition limiting reasons) would need special
defines.

BTW, have you checked with the guys who wrote the your compiler why it does
not have namespaces so long after the C++ standard was issued? Have you
checked that you haven't turned on some option disabling namespaces?

>Please recall that I'm not begging you to go support MS in a new product...
>I just wish you guys hadn't broken an existing working one.

Note that as far as C++ goes, the parser has always been broken (since the
dynamic stack was introduced) in the sense that classes with non-trivial
constructors will not be treated properly (i.e., may cause run time errors).

  Hans Aberg