[OpenIndiana-discuss] running sunpro binaries

[Goetz T. Fischer]

yes okay, compatibility reasons. but my question was: "does it still make sense to use sunpro 
performance wise?"

On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 23:43:19 +0100, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
> On 09/01/2024 22:37, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
>> On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 11:40:53 +0100, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
>>> For C/C++, I would absolutely prefer gcc/g++
>> 
>> why?
> 
> As said. the old sunpro doesn't support modern standards,
> and the newer ones that do are not binary compatible anymore;
> and for C++, it causes issues with lousily written packages
> to not compile without nontrivial patches, while gcc just
> happily let them through, see:
> 
<https://www.oracle.com/application-development/te>chnologies/developerstudio-cplusplus-faq.html#Coding10>
> 
> The other culprit is the standards-required name-mangling
> uniqueness for each compiler, which don't let you mix
> C++ libraries from different brands to be called from one
> program (which was dropped from later C++ standards),
> which then requires you to have more than one C++ brand
> of libraries at hand to link (this was one of the obstacles
> to solve to get python scipy/numpy linked when using the Sun
> F90 compiler for the LAPACK/BLAS libraries, which took a lot
> of tinkering with the python toolchain on an old oi151a9).
> 
> So if you don't have specific requirements forced on you
> by already existing libraries using the sunpro stuff,
> I would recommend to always go with the gcc/g++ tools.
> 
> Didn't use clang/llvm, so can't say much about that._______________________________________________
> openindiana-discuss mailing list
> openindiana-discuss at openindiana.org
> https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss