This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ANSI-C++ compliance?
- To: jab3 at hotmail dot com (John Breen)
- Subject: Re: ANSI-C++ compliance?
- From: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Sep 98 10:53:23 PDT
- Cc: egcs at cygnus dot com
> 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...".
I'm currently doing commercial code that goes through a number of
commercial compilers, as well as egcs, including compilers from Sun,
Microsoft, and HP.
egcs is closer to the ISO C++ standard than Sun's or Microsoft's current
offering.
> 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?
No.
However, breaking the API is an issue with some ... Red Hat says they
won't ship egcs-1.1 for that reason.