The only software company that I know for a fact that compiles
commercial software with GNU's g++ compiler is an outfit called
"Microsoft". They have a new version of a product they call "Office
for Mac" (which is actually not one application, but five: Excel,
PowerPoint, Word, Entourage and Messenger) each one written in C or C+
+ and each one compiled with the GNU gcc/g++ compiler on OS X.
That's an interesting point, because of course, Apple itself
uses g++ internally; it's their "official" compiler. I suspect
that most commercial applications for Apple or for Linux use
g++.
Of course, that doesn't prove anything concerning what the
license actually says. There are two possible situations: it is
OK (which I'm actually pretty sure is the case), or they've just
gotten away with it until now.
Of course that's just one software company, so I would reach any
conclusion from my example. After all, it could be that no one in that
company has ever heard of the GNU license - or it could be that there
are no lawyers working for that company.
Or that they have large enough pockets to make the legal
proceding draw out until their opponents give up
.
As it is:
-- Another poster has pointed out that there is a special
exception to the GPL for the g++ library, to ensure that
code doesn't accidentally become tainted, so there should be
no problem.
-- Even without knowing about this exception, I felt
sufficiently sure concerning the intent of the people
involved with g++ to feel safe using it in commercial
applications.
-- But neither the other poster nor myself are your company's
lawyers, and they are the ones you have to convince:-(.