Mon Sep 14 17:12:00 GMT 1998
> From: "John Breen" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 09:00:27 PDT
> 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?
He either knows well the obstacles involved in porting to g++, or he
doesn't. If he does, then yes, porting random non-portable code to
g++ can require large amounts of time. For example, all he has to do
is require one feature to work, and use it extensively, and presto,
truly a nightmare to port. Easier to just fix the one bug in the
compiler to port the application.
If he doesn't know, then maybe he has simply been scared away
previously, for whatever reason. I mean there was a time when C++ EH
and member templates weren't supported, those days are pretty much
over now, but there are still some rough edges wrt namespaces.
Everyone will have a different range of experiences. Compliance is an
opinion, and we know that everyone has one. The fact remains that g++
seeks to be compliant with ANSI C++, and usually does a good job, but
not always flawless.
More information about the Gcc