Subject: Re: c++ vs. g++ front end
To: None <tech-userlevel@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Peter Howlett <Peter.Howlett@ASG.unb.ca>
Date: 03/20/1996 16:03:55
On 20-Mar-96 James Michael Chacon wrote:
>>> I'd like to recommend that the default C++ compiler front end be
>>> changed from g++ to c++.
>>And which other library can be used as a replacement for libg++?
>libg++ doesn't provide any required functionality in order to program in c++.
>libstdc++ and libio provide the basic functionality. And those 2 libraries
>are distributed under a modified LGPL which doesn't require you to provide
>source/linkable images when linking against them.
Ok, perhaps I am confused, but I was under the impression that
the LGPL license for libg++ (using g++ String type, DLList, etc...)
meant that you only have to provide object file format of your code
if requested. Source is not something that you are required to provide,
except for the original source of the actual library itself. Is
this not correct?
If it is correct, what's the big deal. Giving the object files may
help in disassembling a program, but they can still do it anyway
on a binary. So is it worth reproducing the useful stuff like some
of the stl type things in libg++2.7.1, just to avoid LGPL?