: During all the email that flew back and forth leading
: up to the final version of the C++ survey for Interex,
: the question was raised as to whether or not the C++
: on HP-UX might be an adaptation of the ATT CFRONT
: C++ compiler (I believe several other vendors have
: ported this ATT product to their platforms and use it
: as the basis for their C++).
 
: Whether HP-UX C++ is or is not an implementation of
: ATT CFRONT would seem to be a factor that people
: might want to consider when putting in their 2 cents
: worth, on whether they would like to see GNU  C++
: or HP-UX  C++ on the 3000.
 
: I asked the HP person I have been talking 3000 C++
: to about this, and he said he wasn't sure.  Anybody on
: the list know ??  Can anyone from HP confirm one
: way or the other ??
 
My *UNOFFICIAL* confirmation is that yes, HP C++ on HP9000
systems is indeed based upon ATT/USL/Novell cfront technology
for its "front-end" technology.  It should be noted that it is
*NOT* a simple cfront port such as most vendors did with cfront.
HP C++ is an enhanced version of cfront (for instance it
includes a 1-pass native compilation mode for its "back-end"
instead of typical cfront 2-pass translate to C and then
compile the C code) which contains everything you would
expect in a cfront-based implementation plus lots of stuff
to make it better on HP-UX including HP compile-line options,
library support and include file support, symbolic debug
extensions and more to make it a better product than a basic
cfront product.  At its heart, HP C++ *is* currently based upon
cfront, for better or for worse.
 
Brad Ahlf
[log in to unmask]