This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: Re: C++ PATCH: PR 20599 (1/3)
- From: "Doug Gregor" <doug dot gregor at gmail dot com>
- To: "Paolo Carlini" <pcarlini at suse dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, libstdc++ <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 13:45:24 -0400
- Subject: Re: Re: C++ PATCH: PR 20599 (1/3)
- References: <FEC59D4C-899B-417C-BC01-193397613C05@cs.indiana.edu> <24b520d20609141104y562fa3eft966df4d370cf0e78@mail.gmail.com> <450A658C.7050109@suse.de>
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.
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...
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.
Cheers,
Doug