From owner-freebsd-current Sun Feb 28 7:27: 9 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from maulwurf.franken.de (maulwurf.franken.de [193.141.110.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C300615251 for ; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 07:27:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gaspode.franken.de!tanis@maulwurf.franken.de) Received: by maulwurf.franken.de via rmail with stdio id for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 16:26:46 +0100 (MET) (Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #1 built DST-May-30) Received: (from tanis@localhost) by gaspode.franken.de (8.9.2/8.8.8) id MAA05603; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 12:31:01 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from tanis) Message-ID: <19990228123101.A5311@gaspode.franken.de> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 12:31:01 +0100 From: German Tischler To: Doug Rabson Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: gcc References: <20655.920182749@zippy.cdrom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: ; from Doug Rabson on Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 09:32:51AM +0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 09:32:51AM +0000, Doug Rabson wrote: > On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > > > I for one would love to see 2.8.1 or newer in the tree for my own, > > > selfish reasons. Many ports (new architectures) would benefit from > > > this. > > > > Is that to say that you prefer it over egcs 1.1.1? If so, why? > > I have found egcs to be slightly better at C++ code (for my own projects > anyway). I believe that it may produce better code too but I don't have > any real evidence. egcs is much closer to ISO-14882 (ISO C++), that was finished AFTER gcc2.8.1 was released. So if one wants to do standard conform C++ programing, egcs is the choice at the time being. (though it also doens't implement all features of the standard yet). -- German Tischler tanis@gaspode.franken.de Apple eaten (core dumped) tanis@cip.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message