Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15]
Previously Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> *) Think buggy compilers. That need extra or special code. That
> don't come with a debugger. That don't have an open bug list. That
> don't take well documented bug reports. That don't come with [free
> or non-root-account] upgrades. That don't come with source.
These days I would just write proper C++ and add autoconf checks
that catch broken C++ compilers. If a compiler doesn't work it
is their fault for not implementing the C++ standard.
Wichert.
--
_________________________________________________________________
/wichert@wiggy.net This space intentionally left occupied \
| wichert@deephackmode.org http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: