Re: [Dev-C++] templates in C++

[Ioannis V. <no...@ho...>]

I haven't played with embedded devices so far, but i assume that a
mainstream embedded system like Pocket PC which has its own Visual Studio
(and the upcoming VS will have integrated the mobile .NET so as to make a=
pps
for the Pocket PC) will have more than 1 companies making compilers for i=
t.
At least for Pocket PC you can expect C++98 compliance at satisfactory
levels. For less mainstream devices, naturally it will take much time to =
see
100% compliance.=0D
 =0D
 =0D
Ioannis Vranos=0D
 =0D
* Programming pages: http://www.noicys.freeurl.com=0D
* Alternative URL: http://run.to/noicys =0D
 =0D
-------Original Message-------=0D
 =0D
From: Per Westermark=0D
Date: 13 January 2003 16:37:41=0D
To: Ioannis Vranos=0D
Cc: Dev-C++ Mailing List=0D
Subject: Re: [Dev-C++] templates in C++=0D
 =0D
A lot of compilers for the more unusual targets are developed by one or=0D
two persons. For a C compiler, processing the language is trivial. The=0D
only real work is to generate code - especially for some more excentric=0D
processors. Ever tried to generate code for a processor without real=0D
stack, and 8 hardcoded return addresses?=0D
 =0D
While it's possible to use Lex and Yacc and write a working C compiler as=
=0D
an examination work at the university, trying to handle the current C++=0D
standard is evilishly hard. Operator overloading, polymorphism, templates=
,=0D
multiple inherritance etc does take quite a lot of time to get correct.=0D
For a small company supplying the only C++ compiler for a specific target=
,=0D
there really isn't much incentives to spend man-months or man-years to go=
=0D
for the last standard, or to handle all of the fine-prints. In the end, i=
f=0D
they don't make more money from selling the product then they have to=0D
spend maintaining it, there really isn't any reason to continue.=0D
 =0D
/Per W=0D
 =0D
 =0D
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Ioannis Vranos wrote:=0D
 =0D
> Well to be accurate, MS has decided to provide new releases of the VS v=
ery=0D
> often. The upcoming 14 April 2003 the Visual Studio 2003 will be releas=
ed=0D
> and VC++ will be even more ANSI C++ compliant.=0D
>=0D
>=0D
> For smaller platforms things may be a bit slower, but is there nowadays
any=0D
> C compiler that does not support C90? Eventually all compilers will
support=0D
> C++98.=0D
>=0D
>=0D
> Ioannis Vranos=0D
>=0D
> * Programming pages: http://www.noicys.freeurl.com=0D
> * Alternative URL: http://run.to/noicys=0D
>=0D
> -------Original Message-------=0D
>=0D
> From: Per Westermark=0D
> Date: 13 January 2003 16:14:39=0D
> To: Ioannis Vranos=0D
> Cc: dev...@li...=0D
> Subject: Re: [Dev-C++] templates in C++=0D
>=0D
> Ahem. Look how soon Microsoft Visual C++ gets updated to be compatible=0D
> with the C++ standard.=0D
>=0D
> Also, while the major players may strive for standard adherence, a lot =
of=0D
> smaller compilers - for smaller operating systems, embedded development=
=0D
> etc - will have a very tough time. For some platforms, there might neve=
r=0D
> be a compiler with the latest C++ standard.=0D
>=0D
> /Per W =0D
=20