Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!lanl!lambda!dwf From: dwf@prudence.lanl.gov (David W. Forslund) Newsgroups: gnu.g++ Subject: Re: Help with g++ (1.36) Message-ID: Date: 16 Oct 89 12:51:48 GMT References: <46943@bbn.COM> <8910160320.AA17421@lurch.Stanford.EDU> Sender: news@lanl.gov Distribution: gnu Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory Lines: 29 In-reply-to: tiemann@LURCH.STANFORD.EDU's message of 16 Oct 89 03:20:17 GMT Michael Tiemann writes: When you next install GNU C++, think of it more like GCC for a new language that needs all the other GNU tools to work, and less like its old self, which was GNU C++ not relying on a lot of tools, but relying on a lot of system support work instead. While I am at it, note that ld++ no longer needs to exist. The GNU linker distributed with GNU C++ (and perhaps the current version distributed by FSF) works without modification or special flags. This means, among other things, that you can compile C++ programs with `gcc' (as opposed to `g++') and the right things will happen, provided you have named your files with the right extension (.cc or .C or .cxx). I would like to voice my objection to this style for differentiating gcc and g++. I believe it is perfectly within the C++ specification to have .c as a suffix for C++ programs. The suffix should not be the distinguishing characteristic of C++ programs necessarily. Some other mechanism should be used to distinguish C++ programs other than the suffix. -- David Forslund MS E531 Los Alamos National Laboratory Los Alamos, NM 87545 (505) 665-1907 (dwf@lanl.gov)