This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC viciously beaten by ICC in trig test!
Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net> writes:
> > They are no more than C libraries are tied to compilers. In fact, in
> > the old days, libg++ used to come in a separate package. More to the
> > point, you have a huge amount of C++ libraries out there that are no
> > more tied to the details of compilers.
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 12:27:54PM -0500, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> OK, noted.
>
> Should we spin off libstdc++-v3? Why or why not?
As the saying goes, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Our current C++
development process seems to be working well; there are still more bugs
than I'd like, but we are making huge progress.
> libg++ was distributed separately, but my recollection is that it was
> pretty closely tied to the g++ release cycle. After all, g++ used to
> be released separately too, but that didn't mean that it wasn't
> closely tied to gcc.
The old libg++ model allowed for looser coupling: bug fix versions of
libg++ could be released at a different pace than bug fix versions of the
compiler, but the first two digits of version numbers had to match.
This gave the ability to release bug fixes for one without doing a new
release of the other.