Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 03:46:16 -0400 From: parv <parv_fm@emailgroups.net> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: f-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: is gcc 3.2 port "complete"? Message-ID: <20021010074616.GA52776@moo.holy.cow> In-Reply-To: <20021010063433.GA6809@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20021009213907.GA319@moo.holy.cow> <20021010063433.GA6809@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
in message <20021010063433.GA6809@xor.obsecurity.org>,
wrote Kris Kennaway thusly...
>
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 05:39:07PM -0400, parv wrote:
> > is this port "complete" as far as "-ansi -pedantic-errors -Wall"
> > options are (iow, ANSI/ISO compliance is) concerned?
>
> Sorry, I have no idea what you're asking.
the issue for me is standard C++ programming.
the gcc 2.95 included w/ -stable is very sloppy regarding namespace.
that is, it doesn't fail to compile the following program, which it
should ("-x c++ -ansi -pedantic-errors -Wall" options)...
#include <#iostream>
int main()
{ // notice "cout" stream is missing namespace "std"
cout << "moo";
return 0;
}
a few days ago i noticed on -ports list that gcc v3.2 was really
gcc v3.1; i was wondering if the gcc32 port is really a v3.2
port.
so i asked if lang/gcc32 was a complete (read: real v3.2) standards
complaint port. i am sorry if i wasn't clear earlier; doubly so if
i have confused even more (people).
- parv
--
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021010074616.GA52776>