Re: possible red flag for new C++ parser

[Marcus Meissner <meissner at suse dot de>]

On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 11:02:38AM -0600, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
> 
> >      It will be a threat to projects that don't care to bring their
> >      sources into accordance with language standards, but that's not
> >      something that we should be concerned about.
> > 
> > Why not?  What if such projects overlap with either or both the goals
> > of the GNU project or the product lines of the vendors?
> 
> You forget that many of us are involved in more than the gcc project. Many 
> came to gcc since they felt the need to improve it since they needed it 
> for their own projects.
> 
> And as Joe already pointed out, there are the ones that fix other packages 
> (Debian, RedHat, SuSE people). They'll make sure that the necessary 
> patches are also propagated upwards.
> 
> > To be sure -- it's a purely hypothetical concern until the size of the
> > problem actually measured.
> 
> Right -- hypthetical. I'd bet, many people would prefer it if rather than 
> writing long mails, someone would actually try to use gcc3.4 on some of 
> the packages being spoken about. Theory without practice is somewhat 
> useless.

According to Dirk Mueller parts of QT does not compile as of this time.
See GNATs PRs 9537 and 9440.

Ciao, Marcus