Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 21:29:01 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: C++ templates and cygwin?
Message-ID: <20011003212901.B5900@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References: <04b201c14c73$12b6bb80$01000001 AT lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <04b201c14c73$12b6bb80$01000001@lifelesswks>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i

On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 11:22:40AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>Chris,
>    Whats your opinion on c++ template use within Cygwin. I'm not
>necessarily talking the STL, just that for things like lists, derived
>classes don't really suite, and recoding list traversal for the nth time
>is kinda... well boring.
>
>Also abstracting the code up one level does allow future replacement of
>the list with b* trees/hash tables etc wit more ease. (And for some of
>the stuff in progress that _may_ become desireable.)

I mentioned this to Corinna recently for the wincap stuff that she just
added and she was vehemently against it.  Maybe you can get her feeling
on this when she comes back.

I have nothing against templates as long as they don't cause increases
in code size or decreases in speed and I am not sure why they would.

The only other problem I can think of is that there may be problems with
templates in older g++'s.

cgf