Hello Stefan, I presume you've been working with Adriaan de Groot http://people.fruitsalad.org/adridg/bobulate/index.php?url=archives/453-Oooh,-shiny!.html&serendipity[csuccess]=true#feedback
I'm migrating a Solaris project to SunStudio12 and shall be using -library=stlport4 in order to use Boost 1.34. You mention that STLport4 included with SunStudio is open source and hence doesn't provide compatibility guarantees. Can you clarify how you see Apache/RogueWave STDCXX as being any different? Perhaps you feel that since you're using STDCXX manually and turning off libCstd that you then have more control and won't be stuck if SunStudio flags change in a future release. After it's reasonable to assume SunStudio won't drop the -library=no%Cstd flag. Can you confirm If it's concern over the volatile nature of -library=stlport4 that has persuaded you not to select this STL implementation? You could still use STLport4 or STLport5 by following the manual STL usage proceedure (-library=no%Cstd). In that case your choice of STL would be left to the merits of each implementation. I get the impression that Apache STDCXX is an evolution of libCstd, except that Sun are compelled to compile libCstd with limitations present in the earlier 5.x compiler series. This is to maintain binary compatibility. If Sun weren't tidied by this then I expect libCstd and STDCXX would be equivalent. I'd value your opinion on STL implementations: libCstd (not fully STL compliant, won't work with Boost) STDCXX (must be manually selected with -library=no%Cstd and other -I, -L and -l options) STLport4 (easy to use with SunStudio but no future support guarantees) STLport5 (must be manually selected) STLport5 may be interesting as it's "Expression template for string concatenation operations" feature sounds very useful for "std::string a = b + c + d;" style expressions. Were there particular features of STDCXX that made it attractive? Thanks, Paul -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
