it's a microsofty c interpreter, as such, it's got the same
falldowns as java. it's interpreted. it'll be full of microsoft
"extensions" too. even worse, it'll most like be single platform.
if you want something more cross platform, more standards
compliant, take a look for c-int.
(http://root.cern.ch/root/Cint.html). but even if we simply
targeted gcc alone, thanks to the cygwin effort, we'll still hit NT.

The only problem i've ever really found between, gcc, msvc and
bcc for xplatform code, is getting closures to work. msvc needs
an extra &, gcc won't accept that extra &, and bcc simply whines
but accepts it.

I'd recommend with the c++ discussion, that for msft platforms at least that
we target the major players (2 of which are free) they of course being msvc,
bcc, and gcc. (at least targetting gcc, you've hit virtually every platform
out there that anyone's paying attention to).

>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Geoff McInnes [mailto:gmcinnes@...]
> > Sent: Monday, 27 November 2000 3:35 AM
> > To: IB-Architect@egroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [IB-Architect] Rock>Java>Threads>Hardplace
> >
> >
> > >I have great deal of experience with a, er, content store written in
> > >C++ using gcc on Linux and MSVC++ 6 on NT. No sweat>
> >
> >
> > Any comments thoughts or flames about the pending release of
> > C# [aka C sharp] from Microsoft and Anders H [poached from Borprise
> > Delphi fame a couple of years ago]?
> >
> > I guess the recounts pushed C++ past C after all these years.
> >
> > Nice to see.
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > IB-Architect-unsubscribe@onelist.com
> >
> >
> >
> >