Randy Smith wrote: > I am curious what the dominant stl implementations available are > nowadays.
Only one, the STL. In case you wonder, the STL (there is only one, remember) has strongly influenced the C++ standardlibrary. With some exceptions, it has been completely incorporated into the C++ standardlibrary in fact and there it resides next to IOStreams, the C API and some other stuff. > I've used the SGI stl implementation for quite a while alongside gcc, > but a recent upgrade to gcc (using 3.4.4 now) will not compile the sgi > stl, and it looks like non-standards-compliant code is the culprit. > Browsing around using google, I could find very little information on > sgi stl, so I'm guessing it has gone into disuse. Right, soon after C++ was standardised, the meaning of the STL on its own vanished. > Although it has been several years since, I have experienced some pretty > nasty multi-thread-triggered bugs in the gnu stl that were not > problematic in the sgi stl (the bug had to do with inherent > thread-safety problems in gnu stl's implementation of string creation). Which bug number? Did you check if it got fixed? Or did you check if it was a bug at all and not just misuse? > If not, is gnu stl considered production quality? It comes with a testsuite and is considered production quality. > what else do people use? FYI, every C++ compiler comes with a standardlibrary. Other than that, I'm aware of STLport (free) and Dinkumware (commercial) which provide standardlibraries without compilers, usually as replacement for the inferior vendor-supplied ones, sometimes they are even licensed to compiler vendors as native standardlibraries. Uli -- http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html http://parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/ _______________________________________________ help-gplusplus mailing list help-gplusplus@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gplusplus
