Thread: iostream - Digital Mars C/C++ Compiler

It would seem you unzip the stlport on top of the compiler.

Is there a reason you are using this compiler? The compiler has pretty poor C++ support*, so it would be better to use a more modern compiler. Candidates include Visual Studio which is a really nice integrated IDE (but is pretty big) and GCC, which is really cutting edge with modern C++ support.

* C++11 support is pretty much lacking all over the place.

Why are you so worried about the runtime? You just have to install it once and it's pretty much the same with any compiler - either you distribute the runtime or you compile it statically.

the gcc C and C++ runtimes are licensed under the LGPL, meaning only the runtime libraries themselves (if dynamically linked) must have the source made readily available. you are allowed to have closed source programs that use them. if you statically link the runtime, then your source code must be available as well, because it becomes what they refer to as a "derived work"

the gcc C and C++ runtimes are licensed under the LGPL, meaning only the runtime libraries themselves (if dynamically linked) must have the source made readily available. you are allowed to have closed source programs that use them. if you statically link the runtime, then your source code must be available as well, because it becomes what they refer to as a "derived work"

(I am not a lawyer and all that fluff.)

O_o

The C and C++ runtimes included with "GCC" and friends, `libgcc' and `libstdc++', are licensed under the GPL, and such runtimes have the "GCC Runtime Library Exception" allowing anyone to link with them, statically and dynamically, without requiring that the code being linked be released under the GPL.

The libraries which are part of the official runtime, again such as `libgcc' and `libstdc++', allow this exception specifically so that one may use GCC to compile code without worrying about the license requirement "infecting" the produced executable.

One should note, however, that one will also need an implementation of the standard C functions if one used those standard functions (such as `strcpy'). The library provided by the Gnu project `glibc', which is not part of "GCC", `libgcc', or `libstdc++', is released under the LGPL. One need not use `glibc' though as many implementations of `libc' exist.

If you aren't otherwise using `glibc', or such other libraries with similar "copyleft" licenses, linking statically, as against the C and C++ runtimes provided with "GCC", is specifically allowed with "closed source" programs by a specific exception written into the license for those components.

In other words, if you have a `libc' which allows you to link statically, the "GCC" runtime for C and C++ do not place licensing requirements on your code or the resulting executable.

The moral of this post: every programmer should learn the licenses the tools and libraries used depend upon.

Soma

Originally Posted by phantomotap

The C and C++ runtimes included with "GCC" and friends, `libgcc' and `libstdc++', are licensed under the GPL, and such runtimes have the "GCC Runtime Library Exception" allowing anyone to link with them, statically and dynamically, without requiring that the code being linked be released under the GPL.

I was not aware of the distinction between the "GCC Runtime Library Exception" and the LGPL. the effect of the two is largely the same, in practice, but I can now see the difference, and as you say, it's important to understand these things.