Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <3CF6DDFF.8060602@goingware.com>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 21:20:47 -0500
From: "Michael D. Crawford" <crawford AT goingware DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020412 Debian/0.9.9-6
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: RE: gcc 3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

That's good to know, some of what I want to use it for is C++.

But how is it for generating correct code?  Does the machine code correspond 
accurately to what the source requested?

I suppose I can test myself, but one of the things I'd like to do with it is 
build processor-optimized glibc's for my Linux systems.  It would be a drag if 
the code was incorrect.

Mike
---
I have been looking at the C++ compiler only - and it is much
better/stricter with respect to ANSI.

gcc 3.1 is certainly the one I would be looking for.

-- 
Michael D. Crawford
GoingWare Inc. - Expert Software Development and Consulting
http://www.goingware.com/
crawford AT goingware DOT com

  Subscribe to the GoingWare Newsletter at http://www.goingware.com/newsletter/

     Tilting at Windmills for a Better Tomorrow.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/