This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ANSI-C++ compliance?
- To: "John Breen" <jab3 at hotmail dot com>
- Subject: Re: ANSI-C++ compliance?
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 12:13:05 -0600
- cc: egcs at cygnus dot com
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <19980914160027.25522.qmail@hotmail.com>you write:
> There's an interesting article in the Sept. 1, 1998 issue of EDN
> magazine ("Linux revisited") regarding why commercial vendors don't port
> more software to Linux (actually, this article is readers' replies to a
> previous article).
>
> One of the comments is that "GCC isn't ANSI-C++-compliant," so "to port
> would require a large amount of development time...".
>
> Is this true? I've always thought of gcc as being on the bleeding edge.
> Are there really compliance problems that affect portability that
> severely?
Odd. I've always thought of g++ as tracking ANSI-C++ closely. There's
been holes in the implementation in the past (template, namespace and
other issues), but I've always thought G++ was as good as any other
in regards to compliance.
This may be a perception based on the state of the g++-2.7 releases
which were so popular and had such a long life due to the long
release cycle between gcc-2.7 and gcc-2.8 and egcs-1.0.
jeff