D
Dann Corbit
How is it that the STL (which is part of the standard) can be so utterly
incompatible between various compilers?
For instance, with Microsoft VC++, to include functional, the
surrounding namespace is cliext. But with g++, the namespace is tr1.
If compilers can change the namespace willy-nilly, then it's not a
standard at all. Do these different compiler vendors really not realize
that they are using different namespaces?
In addition, unordered_map may or may not be present. Hasn't
unordered_map been around for a long time now? It seems like the days
when the only place to get an implementation of the STL was stlport were
better because at least it was the same. Now (to quote Forrest Gump),
the STL is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you are going
to get.
incompatible between various compilers?
For instance, with Microsoft VC++, to include functional, the
surrounding namespace is cliext. But with g++, the namespace is tr1.
If compilers can change the namespace willy-nilly, then it's not a
standard at all. Do these different compiler vendors really not realize
that they are using different namespaces?
In addition, unordered_map may or may not be present. Hasn't
unordered_map been around for a long time now? It seems like the days
when the only place to get an implementation of the STL was stlport were
better because at least it was the same. Now (to quote Forrest Gump),
the STL is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you are going
to get.