Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!agate!darkstar!terra!daniel
From: daniel@terra.ucsc.edu (Daniel Edelson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: SCO C++?  Not a chance.
Message-ID: <16859@darkstar.ucsc.edu>
Date: 9 Jun 91 06:34:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: darkstar.16859
References: <973@sigbr.sigcomp.sub.org> <1991Jun5.211101.17086@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> <284E3C3B.1846@tct.com> <1991Jun08.064804.11348@kithrup.COM>
Sender: usenet@darkstar.ucsc.edu
Reply-To: daniel@terra.ucsc.edu (Daniel Edelson)
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
Lines: 23

In article <foo foo blah blah>
>In article <284E3C3B.1846@tct.com> chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>Why *buy* when you can *get*?

>>I have yet to see one good reason not to use GNU G++.  (We do.)

I don't claim these are reasons not to use g++, just a disadvantages:

1) documentation

2) Source code compatibility with ``current-style'' C++:

		nested types, 
		delete[], 
		cout << endl;	  /* I know: ``const char * endl = "\n";'' */

G++ is better in ways, e.g. inlining, price, source code....
I'm eagerly awaiting 2.0 ...

---
Daniel Edelson                 |  ``Recycle your garbage. Please don't
daniel@cis.ucsc.edu, or        |    make me come and copy after you.'' 
uunet!ucscc!terra!daniel       |