paul@gill.UUCP (Paul Nordstrom) (09/28/89)
In article <1989Sep27.223222.26655@odi.com> dlw@odi.com writes: > >If you're really trying to compile libg++ using AT&T's C++, you have a >lot more problems ahead of you. g++ is not compatible with C++. g++ >even has lexical tokens that are not present in C++. So don't expect > . . . >Dan Weinreb Object Design, Inc. dlw@odi.com What is the extent of these differences? Is it feasible to write code to run under both compilers? Has the differences between the two compilers widened or narrowed with the introduction of 2.0? Are "incompatible" ( :-) ) features being added to g++ on an ongoing basis? -- Paul Nordstrom Gill & Co., L.P. uunet!gill!paul
dlw@odi.com (Dan Weinreb) (09/29/89)
In article <684@gill.UUCP> paul@gill.UUCP (Paul Nordstrom) writes: In article <1989Sep27.223222.26655@odi.com> dlw@odi.com writes: > >If you're really trying to compile libg++ using AT&T's C++, you have a >lot more problems ahead of you. g++ is not compatible with C++. g++ >even has lexical tokens that are not present in C++. So don't expect . >Dan Weinreb Object Design, Inc. dlw@odi.com What is the extent of these differences? I don't know all of them. When I tried to compile some of libg++ once, I ran into several, and decided it would be too much work. Perhaps someone has a list. I don't know the details, and I don't know the future intentions of the g++ maintainer(s). Is it feasible to write code to run under both compilers? Yes, InterViews 2.5 is an example of a very large system that works under both Cfront 1.2 and g++. But you have to be careful. libg++ is not written "carefully", in that sense.