> > One thing that makes me nervous is VC++'s notoriously shoddy support of
> > C++ standard, both at the compiler level and C++ Standard Library level.
> Yeah, it can be a pain, but I'll guarantee you that if VC++ has problems
> with it, any number of native Unix compilers will have problems as well.
Exactly. I think one of the highlights of the testing will not only be
straight-out bug, per se, but catching anything that falls under
> IMO, you're as well staying away from a language feature for a few years
> and compiler version to give the bugs a chance to be found. Think about
> using templates far less the STL four or five years ago.
> > I am currently running VC6 sp4, but I also have the Intel C++ compiler
> > the Dinkumware VC upgrade to the full C++ library (www.dinkumware.com).
> > Also, STLPort 4.0 (www.stlport.org) just went to RC status a few days
> > so I'll be testing against that as well.
> > I think it'll be smart for us to have a backup plan (i.e. people need to
> > download stlport to make it work correctly on Win32, for example) early
> > the development cycle, rather than having to code around deficiencies in
> > Win32 compilers.
> Don't know what this is yet.
Hopefully, there won't be too many (well, hopefully NONE! heh) things that
break. Of course, I'm being overly pessimistic up front, which is a nasty
habit of mine!
> > gcc 2.95.2 has very GOOD support of the standard, so a lot of work is
> > to be done by us Windows testers/porters to make sure we have a solid
> > solution.
> There are caveats to saying this. For a start, zipios does not use all
> the correct compilation flags to actually *use* the new (beta) ISO
> standard library - the default "c++ -O2 -g file.cpp" doesn't use it.
> There's an article in Dr Dobbs about this - I'll dig it out.
> You end up with std namespace being "ignored" and various other
Please do, sounds like good material for us.
> Also, Gnu compilers have quite a lot of "useful" extensions to be aware
> So, I guess all I'm basically saying is - if you want to support several
> platforms, keep your code simple and *don't rely on a standard*. Don't
> regard VC++ as a "problem compiler" - think of it as a good indicator
> of what code will cause problems on other platforms. I've gained this
> one after working with code compatible across, currently, 15 compilers
> including the new itanium.
Glad that we've got your experience to leverage. As a tester I will
definitely grind the source through every compiler I can get my hands on,
for that very reason: finding out if we have kept the code simple, as you
put it. Or, more accurately, given the state of the current crop of
compilers and libraries, what it means to "keep your code simple".