Xref: utzoo gnu.g++:408 comp.lang.c++:4845
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!gill!paul
From: paul@gill.UUCP (Paul Nordstrom)
Newsgroups: gnu.g++,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Query on using libg++ with AT&T's C++ translator
Message-ID: <684@gill.UUCP>
Date: 28 Sep 89 13:26:15 GMT
References: <1503@novavax.UUCP> <1989Sep27.223222.26655@odi.com>
Reply-To: paul@gill.UUCP (Paul Nordstrom)
Followup-To: gnu.g++
Organization: Gill & Co., L.P., San Francisco
Lines: 21

In article <1989Sep27.223222.26655@odi.com> dlw@odi.com writes:
>
>If you're really trying to compile libg++ using AT&T's C++, you have a
>lot more problems ahead of you.  g++ is not compatible with C++.  g++
>even has lexical tokens that are not present in C++.  So don't expect
>
.
.
.
>Dan Weinreb		Object Design, Inc.		dlw@odi.com


What is the extent of these differences?  Is it feasible to write code
to run under both compilers?  Has the differences between the two compilers
widened or narrowed with the introduction of 2.0?  Are "incompatible" ( :-) )
features being added to g++ on an ongoing basis?

-- 
Paul Nordstrom
Gill & Co., L.P.
uunet!gill!paul