Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 13:57:52 -0500 From: leimy2k@mac.com To: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, Alexander Langer <alex@big.endian.de>, Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at> Subject: Re: gcc 3.1 / streambuf.h broken with "using namespace std;" Message-ID: <B7C005E0-BDDC-11D6-9DF6-0003937E39E0@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <20020901183043.GF94999@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > It is *that* simple. > yep. > Rather than bitch that 3.1.1 "sucks"; we should thanking the GCC > Steering > Committee that after much thought they were willing to take the > vendors' > needs into account. I am not sure FreeBSD would have done the same. > I never said it sucked... I think the ABI standardization process is *very* important as it will be an enabling technology... these things don't come without some growing pains. > >> Actually they have been trying to make this work all along and is >> probably why they break ABI compatibility. 3.1 has issues with >> template classes that use functions containing static variables [at >> least a pre-release of it did on Darwin/OS X]. > > Apple highly modifies the GCC sources. So any bugs/problems/issues you > find in their compiler you cannot blame on the GCC developers w/o > researching the bug/problem/issue. > Wasn't aware to what degree GCC is modified by Apple... I knew they did some things... > >> 3.2 necessary for some people [though I hope every time the fix >> something that their test-cases increases by one.... that would be >> smart anyway]. > > The test suite does. We should be so lucky to have such a test suite. Indeed! :) > >> 3.2 is the "more confident" ABI and while there are no guarantees that >> 3.3 will work with 3.2... there seems to be better feelings about it. > > Correct. Not only "better feelings" but "fully intended". But as we > saw > with 3.1.0, bugs happen. > Yes... I think you and I are generally on the same page :). > > >>> It was my understanding that FreeBSD 5.0 release was not going >>> to be GCC 3.3 (because GCC 3.3 would not be released in time for >>> FreeBSD to not be "pulling a RedHat" if they shipped a beta and >>> called it 3.3) , might be GCC 3.2, and was currently down-rev >>> from there. > > 3.3.0 will be released before FreeBSD 5.1. It is my advice to > FreeBSD'ville that we go with a GCC 3.3 snapshot for FBSD 5.0 and a GCC > 3.3.0 release for FBSD 5.1. That way we can get the new features of > 3.3 > into our 5.x branch. AND get bug fixes by importing 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 > into > later FBSD 5.x releases. > Yes! yes! YES! :) 100% agree! IMO DP-2 should have gcc-3.3 snap perhaps even FreeBSD 5.0 release [assuming that 5.0 is released on November 20, 2002... I have doubts but I'd rather it be done properly than done quickly... Its one reason I like FreeBSD and the community.] Seems like things are going exactly as they should... going to 3.3 should greatly decrease developer pain overall. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B7C005E0-BDDC-11D6-9DF6-0003937E39E0>