Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hplabs!hp-pcd!hplsla!jima
From: jima@hplsla.HP.COM (Jim Adcock)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Questions about "Free Software Foundation"
Message-ID: <6590249@hplsla.HP.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 89 16:54:49 GMT
References: <980@mrsvr.UUCP>
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Lines: 38


>1. Are there any users on the net who have
>   used their compiler/debugger?

I have used g++ and gcc, and others here swear by their debugger.  G++ generates
pretty good code, but slightly more efficient code is generated by using AT&Ts
cfront compiler as the front end and gcc as the back end.

>2. Is it really free, or is that just their title?

Depends on how you want to interpret "free." FSF requires no fee for use of
their compilers, but do restrict what you can do with their compiler, and 
also restrict what you can do with code compiled by their compiler.  There 
are workarounds to these restrictions, but the restrictions tend to be a 
problem for commercial users.  Also FSF info speaks of a moral obligation to
support them if you use their products.

>4. If you've used their stuff, would you recommend it?

Not for commercial work.  For acedemic work, or playing around, maybe.
Note, the AT&T compiler tends to be a little ahead of g++ in terms of having
the latest language features implemented.

>Jim Kohli

------

>Furthermore, it is a real c++ compiler as opposed
>to CC which translates c++ to c and then compiles the c.
>
>Wendy

CC is a real compiler that is targeted to a "C-language-machine."  It uses
"C" as the generated assembly language, if you will.  I believe some companies
have already successfully retargeted the AT&T compiler to generate 
proprietary assembly language for their particular CPUs.  The major advantage
of doing this is to allow vendor-specific debugging tools to be used.  
Slight performance gains may also be possible.