Re: What about a non-free compiler? (Re: new port: debian-win32. when ?)
On Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 12:59:00AM +0300, Eray Ozkural wrote:
> David Starner wrote:
>
> > > On the other hand, if g++ is becoming a conformant ISO Standard
> > > implementation,
> >
> > It's working that way. The only major thing in 3.0 should be the
> > export feature, which isn't terribly useful for free software.
> >
>
> Stop there! Is that true? Is that feature available in the version
> under development?
What I meant, is the only major thing missing in g++ 3.0 should
be export.
> also more of the standard
> lib ironed out.
Check on libstdc++3
> always thought that a high quality C++ implementation has the potential
> to be the language of choice for systems programming.
Sigh . . . {C++ is not my favorite language}
--
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
The hell that is supposedly out there could be no worse than
the hell that is sometimes seen in here.
Reply to: