Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!lupine!rfg From: rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: porting tips for c++ Message-ID: <1188@lupine.NCD.COM> Date: 14 Aug 90 22:00:33 GMT References: <943@tcs.tcs.com> <957@tcs.tcs.com> Organization: Network Computing Devices, Inc., Mt. View, CA Lines: 16 In article <957@tcs.tcs.com> gwu@nujoizey.Berkeley.EDU (George Wu) writes: > > In general, most of our bugs were indeed because our code was wrong. >I'd even recommend porting between the two compilers even if you don't >need to. We found quite a few bugs that wouldn't have arisen until much >later if we hadn't, epecially since not a few of our programmers were >writing their very first C++ code, often using outdated texts or examples. This advice is quite sound. If you want to end up with "correct" C++ code it won't hurt to have multiple compilers checking your work along the way. -- // Ron Guilmette - C++ Entomologist // Internet: rfg@ncd.com uucp: ...uunet!lupine!rfg // Motto: If it sticks, force it. If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.