mlimber wrote:
> On May 7, 5:41 pm, Ian Collins <ian-n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> mlimber wrote:
>>> I'm considering different platforms and compilers for a project.
>>> Anyone have experience (positive or negative) with HP aC++ on HP-UX?
>>> It seems fairly standard compliant since it sup****ts Boost 1.34, but
>>> I'd like to hear from you all. Same question for Sun Studio's C++
>>> compiler on Solaris.
>> It looks like you are putting the card before the horse. If both
>> platforms have both gcc and mutually exclusive native compilers, surely
>> the choice is one of which platform rather than which compiler?
>
> As I see it, the questions are interrelated. We must evaluate the
> quality of development tools as an integral part of the platform as a
> whole and use that information to help determine which platform is
> most suitable.
>
> Moreover, we have some existing gcc code that may be ****ted over, and
> while I don't mind changing code to make it more standard compliant,
> I'd like to avoid making it less compliant (and thus less ****table)
> just to work around a native compiler's idiosyncrasies.
>
Well I can only comment on the Solaris tools, CC and gcc. If you strive
for standards compliance, build your code with both. The tools supplied
with Sun Studio are a step ahead of the GNU tools and the compiler tends
to generate faster executables. The OS provides a host of performance
tuning tools.
If you want maximum ****tability, check with more than one compiler.
--
Ian Collins.
|
