Re: C++0x support?
On 06/04/2010 04:52 PM, Stefan Teleman wrote: 2010/6/4 C. Bergströmcbergst...@pathscale.com: Portability is interesting to us, but we're also very much interested in performance. So previous to the upcoming release we only supported Linux, but now we're looking to add OpenSolaris, FreeBSD, NetBSD, Mac and possibly other platforms as we have time to bring them up to production levels. I am pleased to report that the latest Express version of the Oracle Studio (nee Sun Studio) Compilers http://developers.sun.com/sunstudio/downloads/ssx/express_June2010.html supports the Apache Standard C++ Library (4.2.1): http://wikis.sun.com/display/SolarisStudio/Compilers Wow! This is big news! Thanks for sharing it with us! Now if only we could get someone from Sun/Oracle to help with stdcxx maintenance and a couple of machines to run stdcxx nightly builds with Sun Studio on Solaris (SPARC and Linux), we'd be able to be more responsive to feature requests and bug reports :) Martin (somewhat down the page) --Stefan
Re: C++0x support?
Martin Sebor wrote: On 06/04/2010 03:17 PM, C. Bergström wrote: Martin Sebor wrote: ... The biggest but possibly the only reason that occurs to me is portability. The target platform of libc++ is gcc/clang on Apple OS X. stdcxx on the other hand has been ported to dozens of compilers and operating systems and versions, and is easily portable to new ones (check out the nightly test matrix: http://stdcxx.apache.org/builds/4.2.x/). Maybe integrate with the suse build service to catch platforms that aren't in the test matrix currently.. I see SLE11 missing from the matrix and I know that's really important for us and some others.. FreeBSD 8 is broken.. etc Also is it really nightly? Generated Thu Aug 27 15:00:33 UTC 2009 ... It was (or in response to a commit) until Rogue Wave stopped running the builds a few months ago. We haven't yet found a replacement infrastructure. I'll work with you off list and happy if I can help.. I can cover lastest NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenSolaris and various flavors of Linux.. (I'm reluctant for Mac and Win64, but tbd)
Re: C++0x support?
Stefan Teleman wrote: 2010/6/4 C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com: Portability is interesting to us, but we're also very much interested in performance. So previous to the upcoming release we only supported Linux, but now we're looking to add OpenSolaris, FreeBSD, NetBSD, Mac and possibly other platforms as we have time to bring them up to production levels. I am pleased to report that the latest Express version of the Oracle Studio (nee Sun Studio) Compilers supports the Apache Standard C++ Library (4.2.1): Hi Stefan, Does that mean the suncc team will be helping to improve it? If neither please don't hijack threads. I removed maybe too much context from the email, but it was in reference to C++0x + OpenSolaris. (imho stdcxx support is a great thing in sun cc and it really should be the system default in place of libCrun..) ./C
Re: C++0x support?
2010/6/4 C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com: Hi Stefan, Does that mean the suncc team will be helping to improve it? If neither please don't hijack threads. I removed maybe too much context from the email, but it was in reference to C++0x + OpenSolaris. You should ask the compiler team directly what their plans are. I cannot speak for them. My email was in response to your statement about supporting C++0X in OpenSolaris with the Sun C++ compiler (which you have restated in this message). I wonder how you plan on supporting C++0X in OpenSolaris with the Sun C++ compiler, when this compiler does not currently support *any* C++0X features, and support for these features will not be available for quite some time. And the compiler is not open source. So no, I am not hijacking threads. I am seeking some clarification with respect to your own statements. --Stefan -- Stefan Teleman KDE e.V. stefan.tele...@gmail.com
Re: C++0x support?
Stefan Teleman wrote: 2010/6/4 C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com: Hi Stefan, Does that mean the suncc team will be helping to improve it? If neither please don't hijack threads. I removed maybe too much context from the email, but it was in reference to C++0x + OpenSolaris. You should ask the compiler team directly what their plans are. I cannot speak for them. My email was in response to your statement about supporting C++0X in OpenSolaris with the Sun C++ compiler (which you have restated in this message). I never said Sun C++ compiler.. I in fact said PathScale.. (see below) I wonder how you plan on supporting C++0X in OpenSolaris with the Sun C++ compiler, when this compiler does not currently support *any* C++0X features, and support for these features will not be available for quite some time. And the compiler is not open source. So no, I am not hijacking threads. I am seeking some clarification with respect to your own statements. So in case you haven't read the thread 1) PathScale has a port to OpenSolaris 2) We are going to switch to stdcxx 3) We are interested in working on C++0x in stdcxx on the platforms we support I checked my email and I think you just assumed sun cc.. bye
Re: C++0x support?
2010/6/4 C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com: I checked my email and I think you just assumed sun cc.. Yes I assumed Sun CC when I read OpenSolaris, and I didn't quite see any reference to PathScale. --Stefan -- Stefan Teleman KDE e.V. stefan.tele...@gmail.com
