From: Andrew Crabtree <andrewc AT typhoon DOT rose DOT hp DOT com>
Message-Id: <199802091822.AA114578565@typhoon.rose.hp.com>
Subject: Re: iostream concern
To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii)
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 10:22:44 PST
Cc: andrewc AT rosemail DOT rose DOT hp DOT com, robert DOT hoehne AT gmx DOT net, dj AT delorie DOT com,
        djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980208133652.6339D-100000@is>; from "Eli Zaretskii" at Feb 8, 98 1:37 pm
Reply-To: andrewc AT rosemail DOT rose DOT hp DOT com
Precedence: bulk

 
> No two different programs can do exactly the same thing, unless they
> share the same source code.  DJ's gxx is something utterly different
> from gcc.c.  At the very least somebody should actually compare what
> these two programs do in different cases.
I think there might be one notable difference between the two.  
DJ's gxx spawns gcc with its the libs attached at the end of the 
arg list.  The new gxx handles things directly.  I believe that 
with the old gxx, if you pass it a .c file, it will invoke cc1 on it
(since gcc decides).  With the new gxx, I think that it will 
invoke cc1plus on .c files as well as .cc files.  I don't see this as a 
huge concern, IMHO.  People should'd be invoking gxx to compile
c files anyway.