Date:	Wed, 22 Mar 1995 18:55:28 -0500
From:	dj (DJ Delorie)
To:	havemann AT uran DOT informatik DOT uni-bonn DOT de
Cc:	djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Subject:	Re: What will djgpp 2.0 contain?

> We're a bit curious about any new feature that might be contained in
> djgpp because we have been spent some work in order to keep
> portability between DOS and unix (i. e. SUN, SGI, Linux) in
> programming a fairly big software package at the University of Bonn,
> and we found the differences between various compilers especially
> annoying. I know that djgpp cannot be faster than the GNU stuff in
> developing new features, but maybe it would be enlightening to know
> a little bit more about the future releases of DJGPP as well as
> coming GNU stuff.

DJGPP does not in any way get involved in the feature decisions of
the FSF, except for those that affect DOS portability.  V2 will
include a new library, headers, and program loader, but will
not require a new set of GNU programs (hopefully).  The primary
reasons for djgpp V2 are these:

1. Headers that are more POSIX compliant

2. Runtime performance in libc.a

3. Ability to build all of djgpp without needing Turbo-C.

4. Better support for DPMI services, signals, hardware, etc.

> Is there any way to contact people who are concerned with including
> features as repository directories for templates, exceptions, RTTI,
> foundation classes and so on? - When is #pragma
> interface/implementation going to die? What IS 'in transition' and
> what will remain meriting the efforts to 'program around'? - What is
> the 'compiler avantgarde' in the gcc group planning?

For GNU issues, use the gnu.gcc.* newsgroups or the help-gcc mailing
list.  Gcc is a very large project with a lot of people working on it,
and djgpp is just one platform that it needs to be applied to.

For Windows issues, little is going on at this time, although
we'd like to add Windows support!  Volunteering is the best
way to get what you want done, although most people just don't have
time.

> I really have the impression that there are more activities in fairly exotic
> things such as to adapt GCC to Objective C and ADA than to SIMPLY BUILD A
> COMPILER THAT WORK ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE ANNOTATED C++
> STANDARD. - I would really like C++ if there was one.

Again, you're talking about things outside of the djgpp realm.
You need to contact the GNU people directly to talk about things
like this.

DJ

- Raw text -