Lack of portability/standardization in C++

Lack of portability/standardization in C++

[Ted Dennison]

This issue has come up here a fair bit recently, mostling having to do with the
validity of the claims on Mozilla C++ Portability Guide page (
http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/portable-cpp.html ).

There's a really good article up on kuro5hin today about this exact issue. The
direct link is http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory;sid=2001/4/25/22959/3540
 Since its dated last week, I doubt anyone is going to seriously try to claim
that *this* is out of date. :-)

My favorite part is:
---
One begins to wonder if it's been almost four years since the draft discussions
and yet no single compiler implements the entire standard, then when will the
additions currently being proposed finally make it into the standard and then
into the real world in a way that is compatible across platforms and compilers?
Two years? Four? Six maybe? 
---


---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com

Re: Lack of portability/standardization in C++

[Ted Dennison]

In article <kHAI6.1247$vg1.97819@www.newsranger.com>, Ted Dennison says...
>There's a really good article up on kuro5hin today about this exact issue. The
>direct link is http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory;sid=2001/4/25/22959/3540

There's also a thread in the responses that compares the situation to Ada's. The
most interesting response there was this one:
http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=comments&sid=2001/4/25/22959/3540&cid=17#17 , which
was posted by someone involved in IBM's C++ compiler effort.

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com