This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: C++ PATCH: PR 20599 (1/3)


Doug Gregor wrote:
On 9/15/06, Paolo Carlini <pcarlini@suse.de> wrote:
At the same time, I (still) believe we badly need a global strategy for
the C++0x features, for those features adding keywords,
incompatibilities, and all the others: as noticed by Richard G in
private conversation, probably the transition could be managed similarly
to that to C99, only I'm not sure about the current time frame, when
only a draft of C++0x exists
One way to approach it is to say that -std=c++0x is an evolving thing,
containing experimental features that may not be available in future
versions of GCC. Then when we figure out what 'x' is (probably '9';
Bjarne says we can't use hexadecimal), we add -std=c++09 with the
features that actually made it in.
Absolutely. Actually yesterday in conversation with Richard G he made the very same point (i.e., 0x vs 09). Seems a very nice way to manage the transition...
and, I would say, many of the most anticipated features are not there yet.
True :(

Granted, there's a bit of low-hanging fruit we could pick, just to get
the gears turning. static_assert comes to mind...
That would be great.
What about adding something
about that process in the wiki section about gcc4.3 (by the way, I
noticed that variadic templates are already there, good)??
I'm all for it.
Another idea, which may turn out be useful at some point, is that of adding a new warning to the C++03 compiler for keywords which are "reserved" for C++0x: it would help users prepare their projects for the new standard. Would be something similar in spirit to -Wc++-compat, added by Gaby time ago.

Paolo.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]