Re: stl implementations--does anybody use SGI STL anymore?

[Ulrich Eckhardt]

Randy Smith wrote:
> I am curious what the dominant stl implementations available are
> nowadays. 

Only one, the STL. In case you wonder, the STL (there is only one,
remember) has strongly influenced the C++ standardlibrary. With some
exceptions, it has been completely incorporated into the C++
standardlibrary in fact and there it resides next to IOStreams, the C API
and some other stuff.

> I've used the SGI stl implementation for quite a while alongside gcc, 
> but a recent upgrade to gcc (using 3.4.4 now) will not compile the sgi 
> stl, and it looks like non-standards-compliant code is the culprit. 
> Browsing around using google, I could find very little information on 
> sgi stl, so I'm guessing it has gone into disuse.

Right, soon after C++ was standardised, the meaning of the STL on its own
vanished.

> Although it has been several years since, I have experienced some pretty 
> nasty multi-thread-triggered bugs in the gnu stl that were not 
> problematic in the sgi stl (the bug had to do with inherent 
> thread-safety problems in gnu stl's implementation of string creation).

Which bug number? Did you check if it got fixed? Or did you check if it was
a bug at all and not just misuse?

> If not, is gnu stl considered production quality?

It comes with a testsuite and is considered production quality.

> what else do people use? 

FYI, every C++ compiler comes with a standardlibrary. Other than that, I'm
aware of STLport (free) and Dinkumware (commercial) which provide
standardlibraries without compilers, usually as replacement for the
inferior vendor-supplied ones, sometimes they are even licensed to
compiler vendors as native standardlibraries.

Uli

-- 
http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html
http://parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/