: 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]