I finally found the bug: its name is "g++"
Thu Sep 6 09:36:00 GMT 2001
> To put the text below into the correct light, let me first state that for me
> there is no such thing like free software, I like the ideas of the free
> software foundation and I cling to free software whereever I can
> (linux forever!)
> I write this here because I am concerned about what happened to the core
> system, the heart of all this: GCC has becomme ill and parts of it are going
> to die if things go on the way they do today.
> As a (stupid) _user_ of gcc I felt it was not my right to complain about
> misfeatures in a free software project (to be honest: I ignored these
> feelings sometimes), but by now I am convinced that it is time either to say
> goodbye to gcc (and maybe also to Stallmanns ideas) or to put the finger in
> the wound - of course with the risk of some strong reaction about it.
> As a german native speaker I apologize for every formulation that sounds too
> roughly spoken or insulting. In the text below I want to critisize, not
> insult, but things may be overstated in some cases. Feel free to correct me
> So here we go with an essay on a popular free C++ compiler:
> gnu C++ users at the end of their rope:
> If You want to use the C++ part of gcc, I just want to warn You:
> !! Don't do it !!
> I use gcc/g++ for 5 years now, I installed (OK, most often tried to install) it
> several hundred times on different platforms. I _am_ fed up. I have gone
> through every damned c++ bug in that time and payed dearly.
[Rest of rant snipped]
Funny. I've been using it since around 1996. I've always been able to work
around non-standard-compliant issues (the move from 2.95 to 3 was interesting,
but no more than a day's work), and have never really fallen foul of a really
nasty bug. I use templates and the STL heavily, as well as multiple/virtual
So, I for one vehemently disagree with the poster and wish to congratulate the
developers on all the hard work they do day-in and day-out.
More information about the Gcc-bugs