From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964917AbWD0D5i (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Apr 2006 23:57:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932421AbWD0D5i (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Apr 2006 23:57:38 -0400 Received: from willy.net1.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:8964 "EHLO willy.net1.nerim.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932417AbWD0D5h (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Apr 2006 23:57:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 05:57:09 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Roman Kononov Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org Subject: Re: C++ pushback Message-ID: <20060427035709.GF13027@w.ods.org> References: <20060426034252.69467.qmail@web81908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20060426200134.GS25520@lug-owl.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 06:00:52PM -0500, Roman Kononov wrote: > Linus Torvalds wrote: > > - the compilers are slower, and less reliable. This is _less_ of an > > issue these days than it used to be (at least the reliability part), > > but it's still true. > G++ compiling heavy C++ is a bit slower than gcc. The g++ front end is > reliable enough. Do you have a particular bug in mind? Obviously you're not interested in gcc evolutions. I suggest that you take your browser to http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.4/changes.html#3.4.5 This is the last version which showed per-subsystem problem reports before they used SVN. Just count the lines : 9 bugs fixed for C, 45 for C++. And when you read those bugs, you don't have the feeling of reading a description of something that people make their code rely on. Regards, Willy