On 9 July 2012 14:18, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 01:26 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Namespace-Association.html says:
>>
>> "Caution: The semantics of this extension are not fully defined. Users
>> should refrain from using this extension as its semantics may change
>> subtly over time. It is possible that this extension will be removed
>> in future versions of G++. "
>>
>> Is it safe to assume that the semantics are now fixed to match those
>> of C++11 inline namespaces and will not change unless removed?
>
>
> Yes, but people should use inline namespaces instead; we should deprecate
> this form and then remove it in 4.9.
* doc/extend.texi (Namespace Association): Alter cautionary text.
How's this, OK for trunk?
commit d6a414f6ebcd96645a1a6612e324eafee24b39e9
Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely....@gmail.com>
Date: Tue Jul 10 21:21:09 2012 +0100
* doc/extend.texi (Namespace Association): Alter cautionary text.
diff --git a/gcc/doc/extend.texi b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
index 91e7385..c3faf09 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
@@ -15527,10 +15527,9 @@ See also @ref{Namespace Association}.
@node Namespace Association
@section Namespace Association
-@strong{Caution:} The semantics of this extension are not fully
-defined. Users should refrain from using this extension as its
-semantics may change subtly over time. It is possible that this
-extension will be removed in future versions of G++.
+@strong{Caution:} The semantics of this extension are equivalent
+to C++ 2011 inline namespaces. Users should use inline namespaces
+instead as this extension will be removed in future versions of G++.
A using-directive with @code{__attribute ((strong))} is stronger
than a normal using-directive in two ways:
