> Regarding what's a small vs large change, I'd say that building with C++
That's completely invisible to most users.
> and newly generated C++ library
Not sure what that means.
Thanks, Andrew, a reasonable reason. Time flies and GCC or its predecessor
has been around for about 25 years. In another 25, hopefully GCC will
still be a leading compiler and the larger numbers won't seem awkward.
Regarding what's a small vs large change, I'd say that building with C++
and newly
On 22 June 2015 at 14:55, JohnT wrote:
> I am wondering why it appears that GCC has started drastically raising its
> major version number for minor changes, instead of spending several years
> on version 3 and 4. 4.0.1, 4.1.1 and 4.12, 4.2.3, 4.3.2, 4.4.5, up through
> 4.7.0, 4.7.1, 4.7.2, the 4.8
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 08:55:03 -0500, JohnT wrote:
> I am wondering why it appears that GCC has started drastically raising its
> major version number for minor changes, instead of spending several years
> on version 3 and 4. 4.0.1, 4.1.1 and 4.12, 4.2.3, 4.3.2, 4.4.5, up through
> 4.7.0, 4.7.1,
> On Jun 22, 2015, at 6:55 AM, JohnT wrote:
>
> I am wondering why it appears that GCC has started drastically raising its
> major version number for minor changes, instead of spending several years
> on version 3 and 4. 4.0.1, 4.1.1 and 4.12, 4.2.3, 4.3.2, 4.4.5, up through
> 4.7.0, 4.7.1, 4
