GCC:C++:STL:vector

[Rodney]

nyteschayde wrote:
The code compiles for me. The output is 3 2. So the values stored in the vector are not stored by reference. As for your compilation errors... try installing a new version.

Thanx heaps but thats not what i wanted to hear That is, i was hopeing that'd be passed by reference. Not to worry.

[Rodney]

Piru wrote:
@Rodney

ftp://ftp.geekgadgets.org/pub/geekgadgets/amiga/m68k/alpha/gcc/

2.95.3

Thank you very much, just what i wanted

...there seems to be braind new 3.2.2 there too, but you'd better stick with 2.95.3 for now...

Think i'll go the 3.2.2 the newer the better . Unless 3.2.2 is in alpha or beta then i might go the 2.95.3 :}

[Karlos]

@Anybody

What's the current gcc WarpOS build ?

Cheers

[Piru]

Think i'll go the 3.2.2 the newer the better . Unless 3.2.2 is in alpha or beta then i might go the 2.95.3 :}

Don't. It is definetely very much alpha. Don't use it. Stick with 2.95.3, this saves you a LOT of headaches.

[Rodney]

Piru wrote:
Don't. It is definetely very much alpha. Don't use it. Stick with 2.95.3, this saves you a LOT of headaches.

Hey i almost forgot, i was told to upgrade to egcs, which to me makes sence, because egcs is now the official gnu compiler i believe.

That is, i thought egcs, was gcc ... infact i forget when gcc developement stoped and egcs started. somewhere in the 2.x's.

Ummmm so i guess im confused over the two different directories now theres the
alpha/gcc and
alpha/egcs

So, which one is better? I would have though egcs was uptodate, but ithough gcc 3 was egcs :}

[Piru]

Hey i almost forgot, i was told to upgrade to egcs, which to me makes sence, because egcs is now the official gnu compiler i believe.

Wrong. EGCS (as package) is dead. It merged back to gcc. There is just gcc. Use gcc.

The history of egcs is that some developers decided to take their own way with the direction of the development and branched egcs out of gcc. Later on the disagreement was solved and egcs and gcc merged back together [or rather FSF halted the original gcc 2.x and appointed egcs team to be resposnsible for it... iirc].
Found this link about it.

EGCS as itself is dead. Don't use it. It's ancient. It's just GCC now.

That is, i thought egcs, was gcc ... infact i forget  when gcc developement stoped and egcs started. somewhere in the 2.x's.

Wrong. egcs stopped, gcc goes on. Though egcs-team is now responsible for gcc. I think this is the root of your confusion...

Ummmm so i guess im confused over the two different directories now theres the
alpha/gcc and
alpha/egcs

Yes, you're definetely confused.

So, which one is better? I would have though egcs was uptodate, but ithough gcc 3 was egcs

gcc gcc gcc gcc.
Forget egcs altogether.

Whoever told you to use it need to be educated about this issue aswell.

[Rodney]

in my opinion you should install a newer version of GCC you are not even using egcs which means it's oooolllddd.

I think what he was saying is that the version of gcc i had, hadnt even split to egcs yet.

But where i got my information for egcs was i think the BSD sources. I was trying to find the latest compiler for OpenBSD and i could only find egcs. In the read me it said something like, gcc dev stoped, and egcs took over and because the official compiler for either, bsd or gnu... not sure...