Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 18:55:17 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: smp@csn.net (Steve Passe) Cc: jdp@polstra.com, jb@cimlogic.com.au, tlambert@primenet.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Fix for undefined "__error" and discussion of shared object Message-ID: <199805281855.LAA22268@usr09.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <199805261531.JAA22406@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com> from "Steve Passe" at May 26, 98 09:31:11 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > BTW, what's you opinion of egcs? > > > > It seems to have frequent ups and downs. We have been using the > > Feb. 21 snapshot for a fairly large C++ project that I'm involved > > with, and we haven't had any show-stopper problems. But I believe > > some of the other team members tried a later snapshot and ran into all > > sorts of bugs. > > > > One thing I can say is that the template support is immeasurably > > better than what was in gcc-2.7.2. I haven't tried gcc-2.8.1, but > > I've heard that its C++ support is much improved over 2.7.2 as well. > > We're doing a complex c++/pthreads project and found that neither 2.7.2 or > 2.8.1 worked for us, but an egcs snap from several months ago works well. The egcs code *requires* that all your code be either threaded or unthreaded. You must make this decision at the time you compile the compiler. The gcc 2.8.1 code *requires* the patches Jeremey Allison did (and which are in the FreeBSD port now, AFAIK) to support per thread exception stacks. The STL needs a number of changes to allow you to successfully use the STL threading capable functions, since it tries to statically initialize mutexes, and you can't do that with POSIX Draft 4 pthreads mutexes. We were doing a complex C++/threads project, and were only able to make it work with g++ 2.8.1. Basically, we ported the ACAP server to FreeBSD. AFAIK, this is the first time ACAP has been successfully run on a g++/egcs based platform, ever. There are a number ofvalid semantic constructs that both g++ and egcs tend to barf on. The egcs code tends to piss me off, both because it sometimes makes optimizations that are invalid (c.v.: the "octave" port), and the need to eat the overhead of threads in all programs if you want to use threads and exceptions in any one program. I guess the theory is that we should all buy faster processors. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. 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?199805281855.LAA22268>