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] |
Joe Buck wrote:
>In any case, we shouldn't accept any extension that isn't rigorously specified: >if it isn't in a released standard, it should have a rigorous description >with the same kind of detail that one finds in an official standard. > As far as I can see, Doug's variadic templates certainly qualify, from this point of view.
For all the reasons explained again by Doug and Joe, I would like to see some leeway for that subset of C++0x features which cannot possibly result in incompatibilities. At the same time, we must help the users with appropriate warnings, and do more disruptive work only in a new branch.
I agree that we need to have proper warning machinery in place. I already suggested a -Wc++0x-compat warning which would warn about c++0x keywords used in existing code. And I suggest to either warn about or disable c++0x features if -std=c++0x is not specified (barring a way to have tr1 use c++0x features even if not in c++0x mode).
It would be unfortunate if people cannot start to explore the new language features.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |