Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!samsung!think!ames!uhccux!munnari.oz.au!uniwa!pico!akenning
From: akenning@pico.oz (Alan Kennington)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: info wanted on Sun C++
Summary: We're using it, sort of.
Message-ID: <427@pico.oz>
Date: 20 Nov 89 03:31:20 GMT
References: <25950@andante.UUCP>
Reply-To: akenning@pico.qpsx.oz (Alan Kennington)
Organization: QPSX Communications, Perth, West Australia.
Lines: 23

In article <25950@andante.UUCP> mp@andante.UUCP (Mark Plotnick) writes:
>Can anyone tell us something about Sun C++?  The only info we've been
>able to get from Sun is a press release, which says it's available in
>October, costs $1200 quantity 1, is based on AT&T C++ 2.0, [...]

We've got a copy for a Sparc Station 1, just to check it out. So far,
I've tried to compile 7000 lines with it, but only 120 lines actually
compile without an internal error - "bus error or something nasty like that",
it said. But I know someone in Melbourne who reckons it works okay over there.
Apparently there's some problem with dynamic libraries. So it has to be
built with static libraries.
In the lines that did compile, there were a lot of complaints by the compiler
about things which didn't worry the Oregon C++ compiler at all. But that's
normal. No two C++ compilers have the same definition of the language
at the moment.

The thing that seems to make the compiler get a bus error is encountering
a function definition which returns a reference to a class object.
It drops when it sees the parentheses "()".

Does anyone know any more about this?

Alan Kennington.