[PLUG] Qt-Console released (C++ compilers)

[Shahms E. King]

On Wed, 2002-07-24 at 15:07, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 11:24, ptkwt at aracnet.com wrote:
> 
> > I've never used Kai's or Intel's C++ compilers.  I find g++ works fine for C++
> > especially the 3.x versions of g++.  There was an article in Dr. Dobb's a couple
> > of months back where they ran language compliance tests with various C++
> > compilers - the only two I recall were gcc and Micro$oft's compiler, but there
> > were others in the mix.  The results of their tests showed that g++ was near the
> > top in the language compliance department (in fact, if I recall correctly, of
> > the compilers tested g++ was the most compliant), while Micro$oft's compiler was
> > the worst.
> 
> Isn't it interesting that at PCC, at least a few years ago, I was told
> that I cannot take a C++ class there and do the homework with the G++
> compiler...  The textbook intro stated that the book taught only
> ISO/ANSI standard C++.  Now if Microsoft's compiler, today, is more
> non-compliant than G++ 3.0, then for certain it was at least as
> non-compliant then.

Yes, in terms of standards compliance, VSC++ (not sure up to what
versions this is applicable, certainly 5 and probably 6, hopefully NOT
VS.NET) was just awful such things as

for (int i=0; i < some_num; ++i)
    do_something();
for (int i=0; i < other_num; ++i)
    do_something_else();

Would fail to compile because the scoping rules didn't fit the standard,
among other things (this is just one of the more frequent bugaboos you
encounter).

--Shahms