This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [v3] libstdc++ vs. icc 8.1
- From: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
- To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- Cc: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, judy dot ward at intel dot com, pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
- Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 23:00:29 -0500
- Subject: Re: [v3] libstdc++ vs. icc 8.1
- Organization: Red Hat / Chicago
- References: <20040406223815.7810fea6.bkoz@redhat.com><2D564847-8846-11D8-96E6-000393A6D2F2@physics.uc.edu>
>Also what about putting in "workarounds" to compile
>libstdc++ with XLC
>then as we should treat commercial compilers the same.
I'm not putting in workarounds. Read my ChangeLog: I put in fixups.
You'll note that the issues were small indeed.
If IBM puts in the work to fixup libstdc++ for XLC, I'm interested,
provided the patch is sane. However, I don't have access to that
compiler, or for that matter that platform.
Both IBM and Intel have mentioned in passing that they had problems with
libstdc++ when they tried to compile it with their ABI-compatible linux
compilers. Since the goal, as far as I understand it, is to have a
common C++ ABI on linux, I thought I'd try it myself and see what
happened. I found the results entertaining, educational, and completely
harmless to myself.
However, if you don't believe me, be forwarned that I know where you
live, and now I have
cooties-of-the-one-who-used-a-proprietary-compiler-if-even-for-a-day!
*cue zombie music*
-benjamin