ansaurus

Question

Answer 1

+8 A:

I would separate them to > >. That is what the current standards require; it is the most correct and portable code. As far as I'm aware, gcc won't even compile if the angle brackets are next to each other.

JoshD 2010-09-26 08:49:41

Yes, my problem is that the team members using Visual Studio do not mind using ">>". This causes a build break.

Amit Kumar 2010-09-26 09:00:21

Then you need to enforce a coding standard. sbi's suggestion sounds good. All coders need to write code that works for everyone. If they're breaking the build, they're doing it wrong!

JoshD 2010-09-26 09:07:07

Visual Studio also allows not writting `typename` to refer to a type that is dependent within another template. What are you going to do there? The problem is simple, and the solution is also simple. Use standard C++ and not compiler extensions if you want portability. That or decide for a single compiler (Comeau will fit there) that is also really standard compliant.

David Rodríguez - dribeas 2010-09-26 11:31:24

You may suggest the VS developers to periodically compile their code also with MinGW and fix the errors that come up.

Matteo Italia 2010-09-26 12:01:23

@David, @Matteo What you say makes sense. However, we are working in a research environment, where unluckily research as opposed to software development takes the majority of the time. We are hard-pressed for time. Some of the programmers are starters, and the ideal situation would be to simplify their lives, before they complicate others'.

Amit Kumar 2010-09-27 06:40:04

Answer 2

+5 A:

GCC currently (since version 4.3) supports this via:

g++ --std=c++0x -o output file1.cpp file2.cpp ...

You have to explicitly specify that your source code is written in C++0x standard.

PC2st 2010-09-26 08:55:28

The problem with this is that C++0x is experimental i.e. some features may be removed as the standard evolves. But probably this would be the approach I have to take.

Amit Kumar 2010-09-26 09:02:18

@Amit Kumar: yes it is experimental but the `Right angle brackets` feature will exist forever.

PC2st 2010-09-26 09:07:07

@PC2st: But `> >` will also continue to work forever, and has the additional advantage that it also works _now_. The problem with enabling C++0x extensions for GCC might be that this will make the GCC users introduce code that VC can't deal with. Sorry, but I don't like this suggestion. When you're doing cross platform stuff, you need to settle for what's available _and stable_ on all the platforms. C++1x isn't.

sbi 2010-09-26 11:15:58

@Amit: Features won't be removed from it. It is feature complete, and the *only* changes they're doing from now on are minor bugfixes and changes in wording.

jalf 2010-09-26 12:27:41

Answer 3

+1 A:

The way to deal with such problems is to have Automatic Builds and Tests running around the clock, triggered by checkins. This is also referred to as Continuous Integration. When a build breaks or a test fails, you need to be able to lookup which checkin(s) lead to this and point a finger at the responsible developer(s).

See, for example, this answer for tools doing this across platforms.

sbi 2010-09-26 09:04:40

We have automated builds and finger pointing courtesy Hudson but only run on Windows. Hopefully some day I will find time to implement it also to run using Cygwin/g++. But still compiler errors are much better.

Amit Kumar 2010-09-26 09:06:40

@Amit: Have a look at [hudson](http://hudson-ci.org/), then. I have seen it (or helped to) setup from scratch to having something running within a few hours several times. Of the various CI tools I have seen this was by far the easiest to setup, especially across platforms. It should be very easy to setup (virtual) build slave machines using GCC and VC.

sbi 2010-09-26 09:15:44

@sbi, as I said I already use Hudson. The link for cross-platform build tools was useful. Thanks.

Amit Kumar 2010-09-26 09:19:20

@Amit: I'm sorry I overlooked you saying you're already using hudson. (That's what I get for answering on SO with four kids tugging at my sleeves...) So why don't you just setup a GCC build slave?

sbi 2010-09-26 11:18:04

ansaurus

tags:

views:

answers:

Using '>>' across gcc and visual c++

related questions