Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <20011014203220.85319.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 06:32:20 +1000 (EST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Danny=20Smith?= <danny_r_smith_2001 AT yahoo DOT co DOT nz>
Subject: Re: GCC-3 additions - related question
To: Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>, cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
In-Reply-To: <002901c154a1$03e8c9a0$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

 --- Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au> wrote: > 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Danny Smith" <danny_r_smith_2001 AT yahoo DOT co DOT nz>
> 
> 
> 
> > Lately, I've been hearing this with STL code:
> > "This compile well using gcc!  Why it not MS!"
> > Thats what I want -- the first part of that anyway.
> 
> Danny, it sounds like you might know the answer to this: are there known
> issues for building native code using the cygwin gcc with C++ templates?
> 
> Specifically, I've asked Chris on the developer list about using
> templates for some stuff (iterators particularly are getting real old
> for me), see
> http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-developers/2001-10/msg00018.html
> for the thread.


I've built STLPort, Bench++ (Stepanov benchmarking suite) and some of the
Boost package with mingw 2.95.3 and gcc's ability to build template code is
not a problem compared with what I've read for other windows compilers. 
The issue is with efficiency.  Efficiency of writing generic code may be
enhanced by templates.  But...  Debugging template code is a real pain  --
stange errors with instantiatiation of templates have to be tracked through
a maze of headers.  And there is a runtime performance hit.  I don't have
the Bench++ results handy but there was a significant penalty for using
generic template code compared to C code.   I expect gcc-3.0 to be better,
at least as far as speed of compiled code. Speed of compilation, however,
is a problem when your testing.

I would agree with Corinna.

Danny
> 
> Apparently Corinna had some reservations (Corinna - Are you still
> catching up on mail? :})...
> 
> Rob
>  

http://briefcase.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Briefcase
- Manage your files online.