Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!decwrl!infopiz!lupine!rfg From: rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: GNU g++ not ready for anything at all. Message-ID: <3407@lupine.NCD.COM> Date: 20 Jan 91 10:07:59 GMT References: <16008@ogicse.ogi.edu> <2419@bnlux0.bnl.gov> Distribution: na Organization: Network Computing Devices, Inc., Mt. View, CA Lines: 33 In article <2419@bnlux0.bnl.gov> drs@ax61.bnl.gov writes: +In article daves@curie.ces.CWRU.Edu (Dave Stoutamire) writes: +> +> o Response time on reported bugs is pretty good. There are +> people working on them as we speak. G++ is getting better. +> + + Is this true? The last time I looked at prep.ai.mit.edu, the g++ code +had not changed since last spring. Is it considered bug-free now... Not by me. +...or do you +have to subscribe to Mike's company to get any further upgrades? That is a question in many people's minds. Michael should answer this question here (in this newsgroup) once and for all. I don't believe that I have ever seen him do that. As long as he refrains from answering this question publically, people are going to tend to believe that he has something to hide. That's just human nature. I personally believe that Michael et al will make future upgrades publically available, but (for their own good) Cygnus should make some clear statement on this issue so that people will understand their position. -- // 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.