Carl,
You've got some great suggestions...how about submitting some great patches
to support them? ;)
-jdb
On 6/30/01 7:29 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi, Folks.
>
> I'd like to request that support be added for more current versions
> of the platforms that Xerces-C provides.
>
> For example, Solaris has more market share in the UNIX marketplace
> than any other UNIX vendor. Yet the supported Solaris platform is
> for a version of the OS that has been unsupported by SUN for well
> over a year, and is two revisions behind the currently shipping
> version of Solaris 8. Solaris 9 is in the wings, and although a
> shipping date has not been announced, bug reports from beta
> testers are common on Sun's support site. When Solaris 9 ships,
> Xerces will then be available for a version three generations behind
> the current one.
>
> Also, the C/C++ 4.2 compilers have not been shipped for some years,
> and are not available from SUN. The alternative of course is the gcc
> compilers. But they have not been optimized for the Ultra-Sparc chips
> that are currently being shipped, and most serious development folks
> stick with the commercial compilers, because of the readily available
> support.
>
> To address these issues, it would be great if the team could add
> support for the 'current' shipping configuration on each major platform.
> For Sun, this would be Solaris 8 for Sparc/X86, and the Forte 6
> compilers from SUN. This single addition would be the platform most
> developers would be likely to use on SUN UNIX.
>
> HPUX is also in the same fix. The supported compiler hasn't been available
> for some years, and at least three releases of the compiler have been
> made since the supported version was released.
>
> In general, this applies to other platforms too. I do like the support
> for the older tools, because there are people who have purchased their
> development systems some time ago, and the software works well with
> these platforms. But what about folks who are upgrading to new hardware,
> or are just new entries in the marketplace? If they need to build for
> their hardware, there is no tested version of the code available.
>
> I think the best of all worlds would be to continue with the current
> supported combinations, but to add the most current OS/Compiler
> combination for each major platform. The additions of these new tools
> will also force some code cleanup, as the newer compilers are more
> strict in some ways. Certainly some of the newer compilers are more
> compliant with the standards, which is a 'good thing'.
>
> Regards,
> --Carl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
