🚀 go-pugleaf

shankar@engr.sgi.com (Shankar Unni) wrote:

>Axel Thimm (axl@zedat.fu-berlin.de) wrote:

>>  I tried CC and cc but e.g. neither recognizes 'bool' as an integrated
>> type. Are there any flags, I should have put into the compiler line? I
>> looked at the man pages but found nothing. The C++ progs have .cc
>> suffices.

>C doesn't have a bool type anyway. The C++ bool type is relatively new, and
>the 6.1 compiler doesn't have it. The -64 and -n32 compilers on Irix 6.2
>will recognize bool.

>In the meantime, there's a simple source workaround for bool, which will
>interoperate with the real bool when you get Irix 6.2 (after its release):

[...]

Well, overcoming the bool problem is not very difficult, enums, classes
or defines can help there. (I have received a lot of email about that,
thank you all).
My fears are that it will not stop there. Even gcc violated many ARM
(not yet ANSI/ISO) rules, which should have become standard since 1990.
I refer to the template problems mostly (gcc 2.7.x has cured a lot of
those violations.)
In another thread I read about how much better gcc conforms to the
standards compared to CC. So it seems to me that CC might also have
problems with templates. I think that incorporating bool types should
not be a problem for the compiler writers, fixing template classes will
almost certainly be.
Is there someone with experience in template programming under CC? If
pointed to the problems one could possibly avoid defining problematic
templates.

Thank you,
	Axel Thimm
===
Axel Thimm <axl@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
Freie Universitaet Berlin
===