On Sat, 2006-11-11 at 12:10, Andy Green wrote: > > I've just always thought of data and code as very different things > > and both likely to contain their own sort of flaws. If you have > > a bug in a function library you may be able to work around it. How > > do you deal with a flaw in a class where the only way to access > > the data in an object is broken? > > Well, in a FOSS library you just fix the problem in the library and > that's the end of it. In the extreme case you have to make some kind of > ugly workaround, the object is in the end a struct in memory that has a > pointer to it, you can get what you need at one offset or another from > the object pointer. Can you provide a date for the time people started making this claim and also the time that you considered the STL impementations for GNU and MS to be more reliable than something you would code by hand in C? My opinion is probably outdated and based on needing some old versions of stlport embedded in our CVS repository for some historical reason or other. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
