SCO C++? Not a chance.

[Chip Salzenberg]

According to sef at kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan):
>In article <284E3C3B.1846 at tct.com> chip at tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>I have yet to see one good reason not to use GNU G++.  (We do.)
>
>To be compatible with system-supplied or third-party C++ libraries, which
>will have their names mangled in the way cfront likes, but not g++.

Name mangling is easy to change, when you have source code.

>To be compatible with what AT&T says is Proper, which is not necessarily
>what the g++ folks think is Proper ...

Well, I did say *good* reason.  :-)

>To get a compiler that is supported by a pretty good bunch of folks ...
>g++ is also supported by a *very* bright bunch of people; however, their
>goals are not necessarily to support SCO *nix.  SCOCan's is.

Point taken.  But when their goals change, or the good people leave...
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT     <chip at tct.com>, <uunet!pdn!tct!chip>
 "You can call Usenet a democracy if you want to.  You can call it a
  totalitarian dictatorship run by space aliens and the ghost of Elvis.
  It doesn't matter either way."  -- Dave Mack