Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/06/09/16:45:17
On Fri, 09 Jun 2000 22:23:33 +0200, Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
ate too many hallucinogenic mushrooms and wrote:
>> >>egcs-291.60
>> >
>> >Try upgrading to GCC 2.95.2 and DJGPP 2.03.
>>
>> That sounds suspiciously like a downgrade to me!
>
>Sorry, I fail to see how so: the version you are using sounds like it's
>version 2.91.60, so 2.95.2 is certainly newer.
No, egcs doesn't seem to use the same numbering as gcc. (And gcc seems
to be using a different version numbering since the last time I
checked, which was a year ago or so.) It's egcs 2.9.1 build 60 IIRC.
In any case, I'd rather use egcs with its optimizations and more
advanced and more standard-conforming C++ support than use stock gcc.
>I don't see anything in this list that doesn't work in GCC 2.95.2. Did you
>actually try it and saw some specific problems?
No, but IIRC stock gcc:
* Lacks Pentium optimizations, unlike egcs;
* Has quirks with C++ exceptions, unlike egcs;
* Has severe linkage problems with C++ templates, which egcs IIRC
fixes with a "template repository"; and
* Does not support namespaces, with some variants *crashing* if they
see namespace keywords, while egcs supports namespaces.
--
Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from
an Allegro-using C++ program compiled with gcc.
- Raw text -