Re: maturity of the c++ compiler technology

Paul wrote:


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


> gcc 2.8.1.1 OK
> gcc 2.95.1 OK (and only 6288 bytes with shared libraries!)


Several people told me about successful compilation with the newer gcc
compilers. Even MSVC 5 & 6 are reported not to have problems with this
source code. Great. Now (October 1999) it is clear that the "Hello
world" example from Bjarne S's book can indeed be compiled and run on
many platforms.


> [Ah, right. The widely used 2.7.x is really quite old. -John]


What is old ? I am working in the industry, my time horizon is not as
narrow as the time horizon of a graduate student. John, you got it
right, gcc 2.7.x is still widely used by people who have to do real
work with their compilers. I hesitate to quote relevant sources (I dont
want to start a flame war, really) but look at these:


    http://kt.linuxcare.com/kt19991004_37.html#8
    http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/portable-cpp.html


Thanks to Joerg Brunsmann for contributing the Mozilla guidlines. The
original question which started this thread was about maturity of C++
compiler technology. This question is answered best by the remarkable
Mozilla document. So, I have learned something from this thread and I
will draw my colleague's attention to these guidelines. Please dont
say this document is out of date (27 March 1998). 18 months may look
like eternity to a PhD student, but the life spans of our products are
expected to be much longer.
--
Juergen Kahrs Tel. 0421 249 666
Millstaetter Strasse 15 Tel. 0421 457 2819
D 28359 Bremen Fax 0421 457 3578
____________ http://home.t-online.de/home/Juergen.Kahrs/ _______________
[In this case "quite old" means at least four years, 2.7.2 is from mid-1995.
Even in industry, that's old. -John]

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