Re: maturity of the c++ compiler technology

Vincenzo De Florio wrote:


> C++ exists since 1984 or so, but the c++ compiler technology has just
> recently reached a mature and reliable status.


Really, has it reached a "reliable status" ? Your suggestive question
seems to be wishful thinking. Notice that here, you already answer
the question you ask later.


> Many compilers were available since a long time, though apparently
> they were not completely reliable and bugfree. Could you give me an
> idea about *when* this state of things changed?


You yourself wrote that it "has just recently reached a mature and
reliable status". Even thinking that C++ compilers are not stable
seems to be impossible to many people.


An exercise to the reader: On page 46 of Bjarne S's book
The C++ programming language (3.ed.) you find this simple program:


    http://www.research.att.com/~bs/hello_world.c


    #include <iostream>


    int main()
    {
                std::cout << "Hello, world!\n";
    }


Find a compiler which is able to produce an executable for this program.
This is not as trivial as it looks at first sight (a hint: try the
experimental egcs-2.91.66). Do not change a single byte of the source
code. Why does gcc 2.7 not succeed ? Which two lines need changing
before gcc 2.7 can compile it ? Why ? Can a language be called "stable"
before there are stable (not experimental) compilers for the language ?
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Juergen Kahrs, STN Atlas Elektronik GmbH, D-28305 Bremen |
| Simulation Division Sebaldsbruecker Heerstr. 235 +49/421/457-2819 |
+----------- http://home.t-online.de/home/Juergen.Kahrs/ -------------+

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.