From: "John M. Aldrich" Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: New to djgpp -- curious compilation problem Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:08:38 -0800 Organization: Two pounds of chaos and a pinch of salt Lines: 20 Message-ID: <32E44F56.553@cs.com> References: Reply-To: fighteer AT cs DOT com NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp211.cs.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Alan Bostick wrote: > > Is that what's going on? That is, does v2.7.2.1 of GCC use a later > definition of C++ than v2.5.8, one in which 'false' and 'true' are > reserved words or something similar? I don't know if the new C++ standards define false and true as reserved, but I do know that GNU C++ v2.7.2.1 does. You can use anything other than 'false' and 'true' in your enum type and it will work as desired. That said, why not have your program detect this condition with a test for the gcc version and if it is satisfied, use the predefined constants. It may save you some time. :) -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- | John M. Aldrich, aka Fighteer I | fighteer AT cs DOT com | | "Starting flamewars since 1993" | http://www.cs.com/fighteer | | *** NOTICE *** This .signature is generated randomly. | | If you don't like it, sue my computer. | ---------------------------------------------------------------------