Topic: Standards compliance of g++ 2.95
Author: kanze@gabi-soft.de (James Kanze)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:53:47 GMT Raw View
"Boris Bralo" <boris.bralo@zg.tel.hr> wrote in message
news:<3c3f0805$1@master.soko.hr>...
> > The library is a mixed bag. The STL parts are fairly compliant,
> > but there is only the old, pre-standard iostream, and no <locale>
> > or <limits>.
> There's no <sstream> header (std::stringstream class).
That's because it has only the old, pre-standard iostream.
I'll admit that in my work, robustness is more important that having
the latest features, and in that respect, g++ 2.95.2 shapes up pretty
good.
--
James Kanze mailto:kanze@gabi-soft.de
Beratung in objektorientierer Datenverarbeitung --
-- Conseils en informatique orient e objet
Ziegelh ttenweg 17a, 60598 Frankfurt, Germany, T l.: +49 (0)69 19 86 27
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: jk@steel.orel.ru (Eugene Karpachov)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 18:12:07 GMT Raw View
Mon, 14 Jan 2002 17:03:12 GMT Foo wrote:
>Starting with Version gcc-2.95.3-20010723, the GNU compiler does implement
>sstream.
>Prior versions did not include sstream, but current versions do.
It is useful but still non-standard.
--
jk
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: Christopher Eltschka <celtschk@web.de>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 16:12:23 GMT Raw View
"Boris Bralo" <boris.bralo@zg.tel.hr> writes:
[...]
> As for standard conformance , maybe you can check boost compiler status
> page (www.boost.org/compiler_status.html).
That's http://www.boost.org/status/compiler_status.html
> That is by no means official conformance test,
> but I found the data listed very illustrative.
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: "Steve Fulmer" <steve.fulmer@dynetics.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 12:17:06 CST Raw View
"C/C++ User's Journal" sponsored a compliance assessment of several popular
compilers and library implementations, including gcc 2.95. You can find
more information at http://www.cuj.com/roundup.
"Justin Johnson" <hroomba@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:K4t_7.194766$8w3.41578269@typhoon.kc.rr.com...
> How standards compliant is g++ 2.95 and its implementation of the standard
> libraries? I've looked, and the gcc website says nothing about standards
> compliance being a primary design goal, yet it seems to be pretty good.
>
> Justin
>
> ---
> [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
> [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
> [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
> [ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
>
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: "Boris Bralo" <boris.bralo@zg.tel.hr>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 12:18:26 CST Raw View
Hi,
> James Kanze mailto:kanze@gabi-soft.de
wrote
...
> The library is a mixed bag. The STL parts are fairly compliant, but
> there is only the old, pre-standard iostream, and no <locale> or
> <limits>.
>
There's no <sstream> header (std::stringstream class).
As for standard conformance , maybe you can check boost compiler status
page (www.boost.org/compiler_status.html).
That is by no means official conformance test,
but I found the data listed very illustrative.
--
Boris
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: "Scott Robert Ladd" <scott@coyotegulch.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 12:45:51 CST Raw View
I suggest trying gcc 3.0.3, which is the latest compiler suite. Most Linux
distributions ship with gcc 2.9x because some older code won't compile with
3.0. I've never had a problem with 3.0 -- and it's much closer to ANSI than
2.9x. The string class, for instance, has the clear method, I believe.
--
Scott Robert Ladd
Master of Complexity, Destroyer of Order and Chaos
Visit CoyoteGulch at http://www.coyotegulch.com
No ads -- just info, algorithms, and very free code.
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: "Foo" <maisonave1@home.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 17:03:12 GMT Raw View
"Boris Bralo" <boris.bralo@zg.tel.hr> wrote in message
news:3c3f0805$1@master.soko.hr...
> Hi,
>
> > James Kanze mailto:kanze@gabi-soft.de
> wrote
> ...
> > The library is a mixed bag. The STL parts are fairly compliant, but
> > there is only the old, pre-standard iostream, and no <locale> or
> > <limits>.
> >
> There's no <sstream> header (std::stringstream class).
>
Starting with Version gcc-2.95.3-20010723, the GNU compiler does implement
sstream.
Prior versions did not include sstream, but current versions do.
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: "Justin Johnson" <hroomba@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 21:54:25 GMT Raw View
How standards compliant is g++ 2.95 and its implementation of the standard
libraries? I've looked, and the gcc website says nothing about standards
compliance being a primary design goal, yet it seems to be pretty good.
Justin
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: Martin von Loewis <loewis@informatik.hu-berlin.de>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 18:43:11 GMT Raw View
"Justin Johnson" <hroomba@yahoo.com> writes:
> How standards compliant is g++ 2.95 and its implementation of the standard
> libraries? I've looked, and the gcc website says nothing about standards
> compliance being a primary design goal, yet it seems to be pretty good.
That is quite an accurate answer to your question: Nothing is
guaranteed, but it is pretty good.
Regards,
Martin
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: kanze@gabi-soft.de (James Kanze)
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 18:52:39 GMT Raw View
"Justin Johnson" <hroomba@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<K4t_7.194766$8w3.41578269@typhoon.kc.rr.com>...
> How standards compliant is g++ 2.95 and its implementation of the
> standard libraries?
Compared to what?
> I've looked, and the gcc website says nothing about standards
> compliance being a primary design goal, yet it seems to be pretty
> good.
The compiler itself isn't bad. No export, and probably a couple of
other exotic features missing, but most is there.
The library is a mixed bag. The STL parts are fairly compliant, but
there is only the old, pre-standard iostream, and no <locale> or
<limits>.
I don't know whether it's due to the library, or the compiler, or
simply that I'm asking something that the standard doesn't allow, but
I've had no luck at all with it in using std::mem_fun when the
function takes a parameter by reference. But I suspect that such
limitations are present in a lot of compilers out there.
Note that compliance isn't everything, either. g++ 3.0 is far more
compliant than 2.95.2, but I wouldn't use it. The one thing you can
say about 2.95.2 is that it is robust; I've had very few actual
problems.
--
James Kanze mailto:kanze@gabi-soft.de
Beratung in objektorientierer Datenverarbeitung --
-- Conseils en informatique orient e objet
Ziegelh ttenweg 17a, 60598 Frankfurt, Germany, T l.: +49 (0)69 19 86 27
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: "Sergey P. Derevyago" <non-existent@iobox.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 19:37:39 GMT Raw View
James Kanze wrote:
> The library is a mixed bag. The STL parts are fairly compliant, but
> there is only the old, pre-standard iostream, and no <locale> or
> <limits>.
Unfortunately, I was not able to find any string::clear(). Does gcc2.95.*
have it?
--
With all respect, Sergey. http://cpp3.virtualave.net/
mailto : ders at skeptik.net
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: Michiel Salters<Michiel.Salters@cmg.nl>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:30:37 CST Raw View
In article <K4t_7.194766$8w3.41578269@typhoon.kc.rr.com>, Justin Johnson says...
>
>How standards compliant is g++ 2.95 and its implementation of the standard
>libraries? I've looked, and the gcc website says nothing about standards
>compliance being a primary design goal, yet it seems to be pretty good.
>
>Justin
Probably the best comparion is at http://www.cuj.com/roundup/index.htm
Regards,
--
Michiel Salters
Consultant Technical Software Engineering
CMG Trade, Transport & Industry
Michiel.Salters@cmg.nl
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]
Author: Martin von Loewis <loewis@informatik.hu-berlin.de>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:32:52 CST Raw View
"Sergey P. Derevyago" <non-existent@iobox.com> writes:
> > The library is a mixed bag. The STL parts are fairly compliant, but
> > there is only the old, pre-standard iostream, and no <locale> or
> > <limits>.
> Unfortunately, I was not able to find any string::clear(). Does
> gcc2.95.* have it?
No, the <string> implementation of g++ is not taken from an STL
implementation, and it does not have string::clear(). GCC 3 has that,
though.
Regards,
Martin
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]