In article <a225bf$3kl$1@inn.qnx.com>,
Bill Caroselli <qtps@earthlink.net> wrote:
“Alain Magloire” <> alain@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:a21r2p$613$> 1@nntp.qnx.com> …
Greg Comeau <> comeau@panix.com> > wrote:
: In article <a1v2v6$5ut$> 1@nntp.qnx.com> >,
: Kris Warkentin <> kewarken@qnx.com> > wrote:
:>“Greg Comeau” <> comeau@panix.com> > wrote in message
:>news:a1s9rb$daj$> 1@panix3.panix.com> …
:>> Ouch! That severely trivializes things.
:
:>It’s always easy if someone else does it…> 
: I always used to chuckle when at a meeting somebody would
: tell a user or the boss that they could have something
: available in 5 minutes. More often than not, it took
: them 2-3 days straight to do it.
There a rule for this, do not remember exactly:
- if you can not make it an hour it will take a weekend
- not a weekend … a month
and so on…
And, “On my desk ready to go” means I can show it to you by the end of the
day (assuming it’s before lunch now).
The problem is when the fool then claims to have lost it,
or something like that. Just gets them in deeper…
(Well, it only took 5 min in the first place,
so shouldn’t you just be able to tell me right now? :}
Greg Comeau What’s next: additional Windows backends and ‘export’!
Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware’s Libraries… Have you tried it?
“Kris Warkentin” <kewarken@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:a1kbfv$coh$1@nntp.qnx.com…
Another issue is that watcom is x86 only…
Nonsense 
Watcom has C and C++ compilers for the DEC Alpha chip, just never released
(WCCAXP & WPPAXP). They are fully functional. They also have skeleton
compilers for the PPC and MIPs chips but they would require a lot of work to
complete.
I believe the reason why these were developed was to target Windows NT for
the MIPs, PPC and Alpha chips when Microsoft was expanding so that Windows
NT was on other chips. Of course these plans have been shelved so there is
scare point in releasing the compilers.
…and I don’t believe it would be trivial to support any other
processors.
Watcom has had a long history of targetting many processors over the years
with different compilers. The code generator design is independent of
processor and so it would be easy to port to another chip. I remember having
chats with a Watcom developer at Sybase TechWave 2000 who was responsible
for looking after WPP/WPP386, who explained the “neatness” of the code
generator architecture to me and its independence.
For a bit of history of Watcom please see
http://home.t-online.de/home/howlingmad/watcom_en.html
and page down to “Watcom History Part 1 - The beginning” which shows the
list of processors that have been targetted in the past. This comes from an
email conversation between myself and one of the 3 original founders of
Watcom, still at Waterloo, Canada with Sybase.
Not to take anything away from watcom but I think their c++
support is several years behind…
You are right. There would be a long way to go to make it ISO C99 and ISO
C++98 compliant. But the bulk of C++ features is there: templates, RTTI, new
style casts etc. I don’t think it would take too long.
Missing is
typeinfo keyword
partial specialisation
member templates
function try blocks
all the recent C++ headers particularly STL headers.
Hope this helps
Stephen Howe [TeamSybase], a member of the OpenWatcom development team
“Bill Caroselli” <qtps@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:a1humr$chc$1@inn.qnx.com…
Does anyone know the status of Open Watcom?
Me . On comp.lang.fortran I said tonight
Stephen, is there any even projection of when there could be a F90/95
open Watcom?
Not at the moment. I think the timeline is this for this year:
(i) 11.0c, non-Beta, proper
(ii) Source code to 11.0c C & C++ libraries released (Fortran???)
(iii) Source code to 11.0c tools released
(iv) OpenWatcom 1.0
I am hoping that (iv) will be accomplished well before December this year.
If it is August, I would be overjoyed. At the point that (iii) is released,
we will have to re-fix the build process so that either Watcom or OpenSource
tools are used. Right now, some proprietary tools are used in the build
process of 11.0c, and they will be completely removed when (iii) is
released.
Right now, I have some deadlines at work (what pays the bills), I have
worked over Christmas, Weekends, New Years Eve, New Years Day so I have not
put in much effort lately in OpenWatcom. But my employees owe me 6 days at
least so I should on the later part of January make effort to get (i) out of
the way.
Hope this helps
Stephen Howe [TeamSybase], OpenWatcom developer
London, UK
“Igor Levko” <no_spam@nihrena.net> wrote in message
news:a1k8qu$36n$1@inn.qnx.com…
Alas, they do not have any intentions to support QNX in foreseeable
future.
The ball is in the vendors of QNX’s court, not ours. I would be delighted if
QNX developers had a newer version of the compiler than 10.6.
11.0, for C++, introduced
new style C++ casts
better template support
mutable & explicit keywords
RTTI
64-bit integers
Original 11.0 was quite buggy but I believe that 11.0c is good quality if
not better than 10.6 in my opinion (which was another good version, I have
this). Please see README.TXT for 11.0c Beta
ftp://ftp.openwatcom.org/watcom/c_readme.txt
Cheers
Stephen Howe [TeamSybase]
London, UK
Parsing is easy. Generating code is easy. Generating good code (in a
reasonable amount of time) is very hard.
Greetings Brian,
I “recognise” you. I can’t remember the context (it was a good context )
but one of your ex-Watcom buddies that might help on the OpenWatcom effort
mentioned you. I will have to check my previous emails
Cheers
Stephen Howe [TeamSybase]
In article <a282c5$gf6$1@inn.qnx.com>,
Stephen Howe <SPAMstephen.howeGUARD@tnsofres.com> wrote:
Not to take anything away from watcom but I think their c++
support is several years behind…
You are right. There would be a long way to go to make it ISO C99 and ISO
C++98 compliant. But the bulk of C++ features is there: templates, RTTI, new
style casts etc. I don’t think it would take too long.
Missing is
typeinfo keyword
partial specialisation
member templates
function try blocks
all the recent C++ headers particularly STL headers.
I would think “Missing is” should be “Some of the missing things are:”
since it could imply those are the only missing things.
Greg Comeau What’s next: additional Windows backends and ‘export’!
Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware’s Libraries… Have you tried it?
typeinfo keyword
partial specialisation
member templates
function try blocks
all the recent C++ headers particularly STL headers.
I would think “Missing is” should be “Some of the missing things are:”
since it could imply those are the only missing things.
Sorry, you are right Greg . The list is by no means exhaustive.
Stephen Howe [TeamSybase]
London, UK