• Anuj Goyal (8/8) Aug 19 2004 hey folks, STLport is indeed dodgy in some aspects and great in other as...
• Scott Michel (4/13) Aug 19 2004 Unfortunately, STLport seems to be "the nature of the beast": libstdc++

Anuj Goyal <Anuj_member pathlink.com> writes:

hey folks, STLport is indeed dodgy in some aspects and great in other aspects.
It is a tough problem coding for various compilers (in various stages of
compliance) and various operating systems (they support at least 15 different
compilers).  Of course most of them are volunteers so they work on what is
interesting to them and sometimes ease of use falls by the wayside.

I have found that their atomic support for platforms is a bit lacking and with
the new Beta HPUX compiler (aCC)  there are tons of warnings emitted... (though
I should upgrade to the 5.0 Beta before i judge them too harshly)

Scott Michel <scottm aero.org> writes:

Anuj Goyal wrote:
 hey folks, STLport is indeed dodgy in some aspects and great in other aspects.
 It is a tough problem coding for various compilers (in various stages of
 compliance) and various operating systems (they support at least 15 different
 compilers).  Of course most of them are volunteers so they work on what is
 interesting to them and sometimes ease of use falls by the wayside.
 
 I have found that their atomic support for platforms is a bit lacking and with
 the new Beta HPUX compiler (aCC)  there are tons of warnings emitted... (though
 I should upgrade to the 5.0 Beta before i judge them too harshly)

Unfortunately, STLport seems to be "the nature of the beast": libstdc++ 
cannot be compiled as a DLL on Win32, rendering it completely useless 
for Java JNI extensions, and the like.