Adrian Sutton writes: >> This builds on PPC & IA32 under Linux. It should build anywhere >> GCC 3.0 is available. > > Why only GCC 3.0?
Because the C++ support is so much better. Also, it handles some command line flags differently, but that's fairly minor. The most important is the C++ support. Not sure how much would need to be changed to make 2.95.x work. > This is a *very* bad idea for 2 reasons: 1. because GCC > 3.0 is still under development GCC 3.0.3 is released, and is stable. GCC 3.0 released half a year ago. It works. Given, some programs do have problems with it --- but that's from bugs in those programs, when they made assumptions about undefined behavior. That doesn't matter to Interpreter, obviously. People have even produced working kernels with it. > because GCC 3.0 isn't available to most people. RedHat 7.2 includes it. Debian Woody includes it. The only people who don't have it yet is debian stable --- but debian is trying to make woody stable, soon. So, hopefully, that won't be a problem for much longer. And, AFAIK, it will compile from gcc.gnu.org tarballs easily on potato. There may even be packages somewhere. > If the code won't > compile on GCC 2.9 then it probably isn't as portable as it should be. Or it's C++. gcc 2.95 didn't have too much as far as C++ support. std::, for example, was a no-op. > > I would like to test the interpreter out but since I track debian stable on > my only Linux box (it is a mission critical server) I don't have GCC 3.0. > Since the box is mission critical there is no way I'll be upgrading to an > unstable compiler so for now I'm ruled out of testing and development. You can install gcc 3.0.3 under $HOME without even the possibility of breaking anything. It isn't that bad to bootstrap (time wise), as long as you only build the C and C++ compilers. FYI, that's what SF has told me to do on the compile farm. If you'd like, I can certainly give you a staticly-linked version built on my woody system. > > So I'd strongly suggest uploading statically linked versions of the test and > seriously looking at fixing whatever it is that prevents it from building > under GCC < 3.0. Originally we were going to build under not just gcc but > also CodeWarrior and as many other compilers as possible. Yes, I'd like to get it running under many compilers. Pragmaticly, however, it's rather silly to target where CodeWarrior (for example) has C++ support today since it won't be the same when we're done. Especially since GCC 3.1 will support every platform we're planning on releasing on, with the exception of Mac OS Classic. GCC 3.0.x has nice support for things like C++ and automatic dependency tracking. With the exception of the make files, which (of course) have flags for GCC in them, any C++ compiler should work. Provided it really is a C++ compiler. When we have working code, we can worry about things that are only C++ compilers in some marketing department's dream ;-) Anyway, I will upload staticly linked copies of binaries on all platforms I can build ASAP. I'll post URLs. _______________________________________________ Freecard-general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freecard-general
