C ++ 03是C ++标准的新版本还是仅仅是C ++ 98的技术勘误（TC）？ [英] Is C++03 a new version of the C++ Standard or just a Technical Corrigendum (TC) of C++98?

问题描述

我很确定我在某个地方（我相信它是在WG21页面上）读取C ++ 03不是 C ++ 98的技术更正，是一个新版本的C ++标准。

I'm pretty sure I read on an authoritative source somewhere (I believe it was on the WG21 pages) that C++03 was not a technical corrigendum of C++98 but that it was a new release of the C++ Standard.

但是，我只看到 -std = c ++ 98 switch在GCC和其他编译器和Alf P Steinbach做了一个少评论暗示，它可能的确是一个TC的C ++ 98。

But nontheless I see only -std=c++98 switch in GCC and others compilers and Alf P Steinbach made a few comments hinting at that it may indeed be a TC of C++98.

因此，当我写关于C ++ 03的时候，是否足以提到C ++ 98？作为一个相关的问题，是否甚至错误使用术语C ++ 03？因为我想如果它真的是C ++ 98 TC1，那么在我看来它不能被称为C ++ 03。正如我从未见过有人为C99TC3版本写了C07。

So when I'm writing about "C++03", does it suffice mentioning C++98? As a related question, is it even wrong to use the term "C++03"? Because I think if it is really C++98 TC1, then it seems to me it cannot be called C++03. Just as I've never seen someone write C07 for the C99TC3 release.

推荐答案

是和否。

C ++ 03（ISO C ++ 14882：2003）本身就是一个标准，它也是justTC1，因为它只有C ++ 98的修正。

C++03 (ISO C++14882:2003) is a standard in its own right, and it is also "just" TC1 because it is only C++98 amended with a set of corrections.

你可以说C ++ 03是C ++ 98的意思，C ++ 98的实际写法修改为

You can say that C++03 is what C++98 was intended to be, the actual wording of C++98 revised to make it say what it was meant to say.

在委员会自己的话：

“ ISO / IEC 14882的第一版于1998年出版。技术勘误于2003年获得批准。并且该标准再次作为2003版出版。

“The first edition of ISO/IEC 14882 was published in 1998. A technical corrigendum was approved in 2003, . and the standard was published again as the 2003 edition.”

其中的无关期限只是字面上的引用。

The extraneous period in there is just quoted literally.

维基百科（这不是一个权威，但如果它的错误，应该是固定的） ：

In the words of Wikipedia (which is not an authority, but should be fixed if it’s wrong):

“在正式发布标准后的几年里，委员会处理了缺陷报告，并发布了一个更正版本的C ++标准，ISO / IEC 14882：2003，2003年。

“For some years after the official release of the standard, the committee processed defect reports, and published a corrected version of the C++ standard, ISO/IEC 14882:2003, in 2003.”

然而，人们可能会说，值初始化是一个新东西，有人可能会认为，技术勘误本身只包括修正，而用这些修正修正的标准是一个不同的东西，一个新的标准。这两种观点都是有意义的，就像我看到的，虽然不是绝对的上下文无关的语句。

One might argue, however, that value initialization was a new thing and not just a correction. And one might argue that the Technical Corrigendum itself consisted only of the corrections, while the standard amended with those corrections is a different thing, a new standard. Both of these points view make sense contextually, as I see it, although not as absolute context-independent statements.

这篇关于C ++ 03是C ++标准的新版本还是仅仅是C ++ 98的技术勘误（TC）？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！