C++ templates and cygwin?

Robert Collins robert.collins@itdomain.com.au
Wed Oct 3 18:39:00 GMT 2001

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf@redhat.com>
> >do you mean the STL, or handling of templates?  I'd have thought that
> >older g++'s were irrelevant as cygwin is built with a patched gcc
> >anyway - can that not be set as a minimum requirement?
> Both, actually.  I thought that there were problems with templates in
> general and STL in particular.  Or maybe incompatibilities is a better
> way of describing the problem.

I'm not sure. I don't think gcc had a full STL until quite recently -
but as I've never used the STL I'm guessing :].

> Now, I'm wondering if there were code size issues too.  Is it
> that using STL will pull in lots of extra unneeded cruft?

The STL is not an issue for me - it's the template capability. I'm more
than happy to roll a new iterator without the STL - if the STL is the

I don't believe that using the STL per se generates cruft though - it's
quite highly optimised code in there.


More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list