From:	khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu (Mumit Khan)
Subject:	c++ vs g++ [Re: Gcc compiler b18 newbie probs]
10 Dec 1997 21:34:52 -0800 :
Message-ID:	<9712110219.AA02704.cygnus.gnu-win32@modi.xraylith.wisc.edu>
References:	<19971210220223 DOT 5992 DOT qmail AT hotmail DOT com>
To:	gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com

"Earnie Boyd" <earnie_boyd AT hotmail DOT com> writes:
> 
> >  - use the right compiler driver to compile/link programs. For C 
> programs,
> >    use gcc, for C++ use c++ and for F77 use g77.
> 
>                           ^^^ shouldn't this be g++
> 

Historically these two had a subtle difference: g++ implicitly linked
with libg++ while c++ did not. With egcs-1.00, they're equivalent; even
before the advent of egcs, I never considereed libg++ as a standard
package, and preferred not to use g++ as the C++ driver. I guess I
simply don't like unneeded libraried implicitly linked in that standard
conforming code(*) does not need.

I haven't checked the last FSF gcc-2.8.0 snapshot to check if the 
distinction is still there or not.

Mumit

* Now we can finally (almost) use the term "standard conforming" when 
talking about C++. What a relief.
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".

- Raw text -