c++ - Confirmance to standard
- "Rajiv Bhagwat" <dataflow vsnl.com> Apr 07 2001
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Apr 07 2001
- "Rajiv Bhagwat" <dataflow vsnl.com> Apr 07 2001
- Arjan Knepper <arjan jak.nl> Apr 07 2001
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Apr 07 2001
- Damian Dixon <damian.dixon tenetdefence.com> Apr 09 2001
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Apr 09 2001
CUJ April 2001 carries an artical about confirmance testing of various compilers against the standard. DM compiler does not figure there. Has there been any attempt to figure where it stands? (They will be doing the exercise every year henceforth...)
Apr 07 2001
DM 8 implements several of the new C99 features, like complex numbers. Rajiv Bhagwat wrote in message <9amgv2$2o33$1 digitaldaemon.com>...CUJ April 2001 carries an artical about confirmance testing of various compilers against the standard. DM compiler does not figure there. Has
been any attempt to figure where it stands? (They will be doing the
every year henceforth...)
Apr 07 2001
The issue is more serious. Please read the journal. Its not that we care about them reviewing or not, it is about inching closer to the set standard. - Rajiv Walter <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:9amogh$2u9g$2 digitaldaemon.com...DM 8 implements several of the new C99 features, like complex numbers. Rajiv Bhagwat wrote in message <9amgv2$2o33$1 digitaldaemon.com>...CUJ April 2001 carries an artical about confirmance testing of various compilers against the standard. DM compiler does not figure there. Has
been any attempt to figure where it stands? (They will be doing the
every year henceforth...)
Apr 07 2001
Arjan Knepper <arjan jak.nl> I have read the whole article online last week and did look into the test-result zipfiles. IMHO it would be nice to see DMC there mentioned as well. Rajiv Bhagwat wrote:The issue is more serious. Please read the journal. Its not that we care about them reviewing or not, it is about inching closer to the set standard. - Rajiv Walter <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:9amogh$2u9g$2 digitaldaemon.com...DM 8 implements several of the new C99 features, like complex numbers. Rajiv Bhagwat wrote in message <9amgv2$2o33$1 digitaldaemon.com>...CUJ April 2001 carries an artical about confirmance testing of various compilers against the standard. DM compiler does not figure there. Has
been any attempt to figure where it stands? (They will be doing the
every year henceforth...)
Apr 07 2001
I read the article - after we ship this version, we'll assess which direction to take the compiler that is most promising. Regardless, though, it will move towards the newer standards. Rajiv Bhagwat wrote in message <9amsi3$30d1$1 digitaldaemon.com>...The issue is more serious. Please read the journal. Its not that we care about them reviewing or not, it is about inching closer to the set
- Rajiv Walter <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:9amogh$2u9g$2 digitaldaemon.com...DM 8 implements several of the new C99 features, like complex numbers. Rajiv Bhagwat wrote in message <9amgv2$2o33$1 digitaldaemon.com>...CUJ April 2001 carries an artical about confirmance testing of various compilers against the standard. DM compiler does not figure there. Has
been any attempt to figure where it stands? (They will be doing the
every year henceforth...)
Apr 07 2001
My two penny's worth :> I would love to see a move towards the ANSI C++ standard. However I can see that it would be easier to move towards the C99 standard as this would require less work (templates being the biggest problem). - Damian On Sat, 7 Apr 2001 11:58:06 -0700, "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote:I read the article - after we ship this version, we'll assess which direction to take the compiler that is most promising. Regardless, though, it will move towards the newer standards. Rajiv Bhagwat wrote in message <9amsi3$30d1$1 digitaldaemon.com>...The issue is more serious. Please read the journal. Its not that we care about them reviewing or not, it is about inching closer to the set
- Rajiv Walter <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:9amogh$2u9g$2 digitaldaemon.com...DM 8 implements several of the new C99 features, like complex numbers. Rajiv Bhagwat wrote in message <9amgv2$2o33$1 digitaldaemon.com>...CUJ April 2001 carries an artical about confirmance testing of various compilers against the standard. DM compiler does not figure there. Has
been any attempt to figure where it stands? (They will be doing the
every year henceforth...)
Apr 09 2001
Both C99 and C++98 are important, since we ship both a C and a C++ compiler. I happened to have an interest in numerical programming, however, so the numerics features of C99 were a priority. Damian Dixon wrote in message <1103_986806731 dilbert>...My two penny's worth :> I would love to see a move towards the ANSI C++ standard. However I can see that it would be easier to move towards the C99 standard as this would require less work (templates being the biggest problem). - Damian On Sat, 7 Apr 2001 11:58:06 -0700, "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote:I read the article - after we ship this version, we'll assess which direction to take the compiler that is most promising. Regardless,
it will move towards the newer standards. Rajiv Bhagwat wrote in message <9amsi3$30d1$1 digitaldaemon.com>...The issue is more serious. Please read the journal. Its not that we care about them reviewing or not, it is about inching closer to the set
- Rajiv Walter <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:9amogh$2u9g$2 digitaldaemon.com...DM 8 implements several of the new C99 features, like complex numbers. Rajiv Bhagwat wrote in message <9amgv2$2o33$1 digitaldaemon.com>...CUJ April 2001 carries an artical about confirmance testing of
compilers against the standard. DM compiler does not figure there.
therebeen any attempt to figure where it stands? (They will be doing the
every year henceforth...)
Apr 09 2001