[PYTHON C++-SIG] Re: LLNL Python/C++ integration: current status

[Johann Hibschman]

On Thu, 13 Feb 1997, Geoffrey Furnish wrote:

> David Ascher writes:

>  > This is not at all a criticism, but I'm curious: does the latest g++
>  > qualify?  I think this will have at least some impact on the public
>  > reaction to your system.
> 
> 2.7.2 is certainly nowhere near adequate.  I don't think 2.8.0 is out
> yet, but early indications I have received make me fear it will also
> be inadequate, despite being a dramatic improvement over 2.7.2.
> 
> We are aware this is a short term liability.  Be we do believe it is a
> /short/ term liability, and in our group here at LLNL, we simply do
> not work with compilers that do not conform to a recent edition of the
> draft.  It will be a great day indeed, when g++ is ANSI C++
> compatible, and we look forward to that day, but we are not prepared
> to wait idly for that day.

This one *is* meant to be a criticism.  By requiring features that are not
in common distribution, you're cutting out a sizeable chunk of the user
base.  LLNL may have pots of money to buy the latest optimizing C++
compiler, but I am stuck either using the Sun CC compiler or g++.  I don't
think that either is in full compliance with the ANSI draft standard,
although I'm not sure about the latest version of Sun's offering.

I don't think that I am that atypical of academia, and I don't want to
wait a year or two for g++ to get up to par.  If this is a mainstream
effort to get C++ support for python, it should be usable by mainstream
compilers.  If this is really just a forum to perfect your idealized C++
implementation, then there's probably enough demand for a separate "lowly
C++" SIG for everyone else. 

- Johann

---
Johann Hibschman
johann at physics.berkeley.edu   




_______________
C++-SIG - SIG for Development of a C++ Binding to Python

send messages to: c++-sig at python.org
administrivia to: c++-sig-request at python.org
_______________