From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>
To: rittle@comm.mot.com
Cc: egcs@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: Implications of tighter integration of libg++ 
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 02:22:00 -0000
Message-id: <5837.887019874@hurl.cygnus.com>
References: <199711250040.SAA09460@supra.rsch.comm.mot.com>
X-SW-Source: 1998-02/msg00349.html

  In message <199711250040.SAA09460@supra.rsch.comm.mot.com>you write:
  > Under EGCS, there is now tighter integration between g++ and the
  > required standard C++ libraries, in that they are now distributed and
  > configured together.
  > 
  > Should we assume that this tighter integration will continue?  Or is
  > this just a short-term situation to aid current development?
We expect the tighter integration to continue indefinitely.

[ ... ]
  > It is desirable to place libraries compiled against and dependent upon
  > a given version of g++, and their related header files, into the
  > compiler's lib and include directory.  Thus, I actually believe that
  > something akin to the above should be the default.  Someone else
  > believed this at one time given the comments in gcc/Makefile.in:
With the stabilizaton of the C++ language and its associated runtime libraries
I wonder if this will be all that useful.

I kinda get the feeling that we'll start seeing releases that are compatable
at both the header file level and at the link level in the near future.

Just my opinions -- the g++ folks might have different ideas about this
whole area.

jeff