From: Matthew French (mfrench42 at domain yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Sun 28 Jul 2002 - 19:33:23 IST
Paul Kelly mentioned:
> gcc has been as good as or better than pgcc for quite a while. pgcc was
> was written back in the days when gcc splintered due to a perception of
> slow progress on the main branch. A number of Linux distributions wound
> up using egcs, partly derived from the pgcc work as I recall. Happiness
> was restored to the world with gcc 2.95 and later.
I do not have the time to follow the compiler "wars", but I notice that I
must use egcs to build 64 bit SPARC code.
GCC 3 should do it, but because it is so "buggy"[1] it is not worth trying
to use unless you really want to track down those compiler errors... :(
- Matthew
[1] "buggy" in the sense that its a feature. Many of the problems with GCC 3
seem to be related to stricter syntax checking. More accurate information
will be appreciated.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu 06 Feb 2003 - 13:18:05 GMT