[SOLVED] Why do almost all of the C++ standard libraries not portable (including those of clang, gcc, and vc++)?

Why do almost all of the C++ standard libraries not portable (including those of clang, gcc, and vc++)?

I failed to compile gcc's C++ standard library with VC++, and vice versa.

Why do almost all of the C++ standard libraries not portable (including those of clang, gcc, and vc++)?

I also tried STLport, however, it is too old to support C++11.

I'm writing my own mini-STL for embedded systems, where I cannot use the compiler-provided STL because of its non-portability. So, I must care this.

Is there an implementation of the portable C++ standard library?

Solution

Part of the standard library's job is to provide portable wrappers around platform-dependent and compiler-dependent functionality. It cannot be fully portable.

There's also no reason why it should be portable. There's no need for it. It is supplied as part of the compiler toolchain. When you have a compiler, you also have a standard library implementation that works with that compiler. No matter which compiler you're using, you already have an implementation of the standard library.