Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/08/15/10:16:32
On Thu, 12 Aug 1999, George Ryot wrote:
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:
>
> > > Does that mean that we will have gcc, gxx and gpp?
> >
> > Yes.
>
> That raises more questions, but I'll hang on to those for now. :)
I don't see any questions here. gxx and gpp are functionally equivalent
but programmatically different programs. The reason for introducing gxx
as part of djdevNNN.zip was that at the time, the g++ compiler driver was
not yet ported to DJGPP. The reason for not removing gxx from djdev now
that we do have the ported g++ is that someone might rely on its unique
mode of operation. In my experience, features should seldom if at all be
removed, because that bears a risk of breaking working applications.
From the user's point of view, this shouldn't matter, since as I said the
programs are functionally equivalent.
> In general though, is it safe to assume that files with the latest
> timestamps should be used
Yes, it is safe.
> Or, as your other post about the use of unzip -o implies, does
> it not matter?
In this particular case of cxxfilt, it doesn't matter.
- Raw text -