[linux-audio-dev] [ot] [rant] gcc, you let me down one time too many

[Chris Cannam]

On Wednesday 08 Jun 2005 21:56, Jussi Laako wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 21:41 +0100, Chris Cannam wrote:
> > Are you sure this is still true in the gcc world, after they
> > changed vector from an array to a real class in gcc 3.3 or whenever
> > it was?
>
> Abovementioned template is not based on STL...

Oh, I'm sorry -- I was ploughing through this thread and just replying 
to something with "vector" in it.  I do apologise.

It certainly is possible to write extremely efficient classes in C++, 
and in many cases they may be likely to be better than the code that 
people would write in C (because you can encapsulate best practice in a 
method that people would [often rightly] be averse to writing in the 
context of C code).  Of course the reverse is also true.

> About the STL; there are number of different implementations of
> std::vector<> in different C++ RTLs

Yes, indeed, but a couple of times here I've seen observations that a 
vector would compile to an array if optimisation was on, etc.  Since 
we're mostly using gcc-3.3+ now, I wanted to ask if anyone is sure 
whether that's really true.


Chris