[rescue] gcc

Charles Shannon Hendrix shannon at widomaker.com
Wed Jul 30 14:52:31 CDT 2003

On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 12:02:35PM +0300, Meelis Roos wrote:

> > gcc-2.7.2 is pretty awful on anything but i386, and very bad for C++. Most
> > distributions of gcc seem to be this version. Seems OK for C code on i386.
> Agreed, but it is a fast compiler compared to 2.95 and a lightning fast
> compiler comared to gcc 3.2/3.3.

If you worry about compiler speed, you can use something like lcc until
you are ready for final builds and testing.

I used to use it for quick builds on a rather slow system.

Lately I've not been able to make it build, though I didn't try really

> One thing to note is that 3.x is quite picky about C++ standard
> compliance. Lots of code that compiled and ran fine with 2.95.* or
> non-gcc compilers gives lots of errors and warnings with gcc 3 and
> usually gcc is right and the source code is wrong.

Yep.  The same thing happens when people start pushing their code out to
multiple platforms and compilers.  A lot of the problems they have isn't
the other systems, their code just has assumptions and errors that need

UNIX/Perl/C/Pizza____________________s h a n n o n at wido !SPAM maker.com

More information about the rescue mailing list