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" it is not worth trying
to use unless you really want to track down those compiler errors... :(
 "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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu 06 Feb 2003 - 13:18:05 GMT