From: "AndrewJ" <luminous-is AT home DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
References: <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 21 DOT 0005312058020 DOT 1241-100000 AT roadrunner DOT grendel DOT net> <200005311635 DOT TAA23319 AT mailgw1 DOT netvision DOT net DOT il> <6ZxZ4.135284$55 DOT 2868598 AT news2 DOT rdc1 DOT on DOT home DOT com> <200006011951 DOT WAA08381 AT mailgw1 DOT netvision DOT net DOT il> <qbh_4.151219$55 DOT 3131194 AT news2 DOT rdc1 DOT on DOT home DOT com> <393A9BCE DOT 2BE06764 AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Subject: Re: Internal compiler error
Lines: 33
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
Message-ID: <XT615.199827$55.4411151@news2.rdc1.on.home.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 14:57:59 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.42.120.18
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT home DOT net
X-Trace: news2.rdc1.on.home.com 960821879 24.42.120.18 (Mon, 12 Jun 2000 07:57:59 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 07:57:59 PDT
Organization: @Home Network Canada
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> You cannot ``prove'' this once and for all.  As GCC is developed, new code is
> constantly added to it.  If this new code looks too similar to copyrighted
> software...

Yet this is a problem faced by all so-called "open-source" projects.  Is this
also a problem in programs such as Apache and Netscape?  Did the Netscape crew
shrink the browser's memory footprint so it wouldn't seem like they had ripped
of Microsoft?  (hehe, that one's a joke).

> > I don't want to start arguing about Watcom vs. GCC, but I will defend it
when I
> > feel the need arises.
>
> I fail to see why do you think you need to defend it.  Nobody is attacking
> Watcom here.
>
> > Watcom's not such a bad product (and it's originally
> > Canadian, like me ;)  So it's more a matter of pride.
>
> This forum is not about national pride, it's about other issues.

Heh heh, it was a joke.  Sort of.  Anyway, what I mean is that when I see
someone knocking Watcom, I will try to correct that person as best I can (case
in point: Damian's readme 3rd from many moons ago).  People seem to think that
you can only use one or the other, and that the one you are using is invariably
better than the other.  I use Watcom and GCC all the time, sometimes one is
better suited than another.  I prefer Watcom's Windows/NT support over using
one of the GCC ports for that platform.  But this is all irrelevent, and is not
contributing to GCC/DJGPP that much.

AndrewJ