🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <jimlynchCC68qB.94@netcom.com> jimlynch@netcom.com (Jim Lynch) writes:
>In article <1993Aug19.185453.15791@das.harvard.edu> jiu@kepler.harvard.edu (H. Jiu) writes:
>>Hi!  Can someone please tell me why you use GNU C compiler instead of,
>>say, the standard distribution that comes with your computer?  Is it
>>a religious sentiment like somepeople have with a particular brand of,
>>say, condoms?  I have used GNU C compiler several times, but in general
>>I find it inferior to standard C compilers on Sun SPARCs, DEC RISCs,
>>IBM RS/6000s, etc.
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>hbJ
>
>Because it has less bugs. (especially on suns)

This is simply not true, and you should not go around making wild claims
that you cannot support.

In the case of C compilers, both GCC and Sun's C compiler are very robust
and reasonably bug free.  (They are about on par with one another in this
regard with GCC perhaps lagging by a very small amount.)

In the case of C++ compilers, there is no contest.  Sun's current offering
is much more bug-free than g++ is.  Period.

>Because the C++ license from Sun would have cost my school $32,000 for
>all the terms to be able to use it at once. GCC has no such cost or
>limitation.

That is true.
 
>The warning message categories are both plentiful and switchable.

That is true.

>The warning messages are _far_ more useful. (e.g., it'll tell you the
>#include chain that led to the header error in your code, etc).

That is true.

>The gcc distribution comes with C, C++ and Objective-C.
 
So what?

>The compiler comes with all the source.

That is true, and is a big plus if you like to hack compilers.

-- 

-- Ronald F. Guilmette ------------------------------------------------------
------ domain address: rfg@netcom.com ---------------------------------------
------ uucp address: ...!uunet!netcom.com!rfg -------------------------------