From c8b796970aec36b1632c9cf7e250c4606816a8f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Wolfgang Bangerth Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 22:48:31 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] Remove a reference to GCC 3.4. Also just editorial changes. --- examples/step-7/step-7.cc | 20 ++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/examples/step-7/step-7.cc b/examples/step-7/step-7.cc index 0177ead3b0..c8bf1412ab 100644 --- a/examples/step-7/step-7.cc +++ b/examples/step-7/step-7.cc @@ -195,16 +195,16 @@ namespace Step7 // class is according to their mathematical definition and does not need // much explanation. // - // The only thing that is worth mentioning is that if we access elements of - // a base class that is template dependent (in this case the elements of - // SolutionBase<dim>), then the C++ language forces us to write - // this->source_centers (for example). Note that the - // this-> qualification is not necessary if the base class - // is not template dependent, and also that the gcc compilers prior to - // version 3.4 don't enforce this requirement of the C++ standard. The - // reason why this is necessary is complicated; some books on C++ may - // explain it, so if you are interested you can look it up under the phrase - // two-stage (name) lookup. + // The only thing that is worth mentioning is that if we access + // elements of a base class that is template dependent (in this case + // the elements of SolutionBase<dim>), then the C++ language + // forces us to write this->source_centers, and + // similarly for other members of the base class. C++ does not + // require the this-> qualification if the base + // class is not template dependent. The reason why this is necessary + // is complicated; C++ books will explain under the phrase + // two-stage (name) lookup, and there is also a lengthy + // description in the deal.II FAQs. template double Solution::value(const Point &p, const unsigned int) const { -- 2.39.5