Just a thought that popped into my head

Ainsley Pereira marble at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue May 7 11:41:54 PDT 2002


In message <20020507171825.6bab18bb.spyro at armlinux.org>
          Ian Molton <spyro at armlinux.org> wittered:

> In any case, what are the GOOD REASONS to jump to an experimental unstable
> compiler?
> 
> so far, *slightly* improved C++ support is the only reason I have seen,
> which doesnt cut it compared to numerous performance regressions and compile
> failures, as far as I am concerned.

slightly? Speaking as a C++ programmer, gcc-3 is MUCH better than gcc-2.95.*
Certainly the code I'm writing now won't compile with gcc < 3.0. I imagine it
won't be that long before others are releasing code that *at least* requires
a more uptodate standard library implementation.
Like everyone else who has actually tried it, I have a system compiled with
3.0.4 and have seen no problems.

~a.

-- 
 ----------------------------------------------------------
  / Ainsley 'Marble' Pereira / http://www.snowplains.org /
 / Don't drink and drive.
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list