Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/01/28/05:00:32
On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dan wrote:
> I suppose you cut out my comment about the long wait for proper ANSI
> complaince because?
Because you didn't explain what did you mean exactly, and I didn't want
to comment on something that I didn't understand. I use GCC on different
platforms since version 1.4.0, which was about 10 years ago, and it was
always ANSI-compatible since the first day I've seen it. (I'm talking
about ANSI C, not ANSI C++, of course). In those days, even Turbo C was
not 100% ANSI-compliant.
> In that case, GNU C definately looses out since Borland's products are only
> coded by a few employees and GNU CC is coded by the world.
No, you need to only count the dedicated programmers, not the
contributors. Otherwise, you need to also count all the people who
reported the bugs (since debugging is part of development).
> No there isn't, GNU C sources have been under the GPL for some time and it
> still has bugs. Just look at the gnu.* hierarchy to read up on 3 or 4 of
> them a week.
*Any* software has bugs, no matter how long it is developed. In fact,
one of the definitions of software is ``lines of codes with bugs'' ;-).
The difference is that in the case of GCC, DJGPP and the rest of free
software, I usually get a solution or a work-around for any problem in a
few days, whereas with commercial products I must wait much longer, and
sometimes I'm told I'm on my own.
- Raw text -