Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-stdcxx-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 67752 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2007 20:03:35 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Oct 2007 20:03:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 54471 invoked by uid 500); 18 Oct 2007 20:03:22 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-stdcxx-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 54454 invoked by uid 500); 18 Oct 2007 20:03:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact stdcxx-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: moderator for stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 51500 invoked by uid 99); 18 Oct 2007 20:01:17 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: status of fix for incompatibilities in exception classes on Windows Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:59:22 -0600 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: status of fix for incompatibilities in exception classes on Windows Thread-Index: AcgRunVhTVM1Bh8lSGa1yFI5Ftx1cQABpFhQ References: <47178091.9080406@roguewave.com> <4717AEDC.20901@roguewave.com> From: "Travis Vitek" To: X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org >Martin Sebor wrote: > >Travis Vitek wrote: >> =20 >>=20 >> Travis Vitek wrote: >>> I totally forgot about it after scrambling to get the other=20 >>> patch made last night. I'll post a patch for review ASAP. >>> >>> >>> Martin Sebor wrote: >>>> What is the status of the patch for the unsats for the exception >>>> classes on Windows? Anyone working on it? Farid? Travis? >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>=20 >> I have verified this patch with the 4.1.3 examples compiled=20 >> msvc-7.1 and the 4.2.0 dll compiled with msvc-7.1. I added a >> new conditional block for this just to avoid any issues that >> might come up when applying the other patch to this same file. >> Hope that doesn't cause problems for anyone. > >What's the rationale for constraining the patch to exclude MSVC >8.0 and later? > >That mixing two different versions of the same compiler and two >different versions of stdcxx is already known to have problems? >I think I would just as soon not make the problem worse. Would >you mid if I removed the _MSC_VER part of the conditional? > That is fine. 2007-10-18 Travis Vitek * _config-msvc.h [_RWSTD_VER_MAJOR]: Define configuration macros to enable binary compatibility with 4.1.3 on MSVC.