This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [C++ Patch] Add __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX1Y__
- From: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:02:43 +0200
- Subject: Re: [C++ Patch] Add __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX1Y__
- References: <5177EF87 dot 4000003 at oracle dot com> <517807C4 dot 3060704 at redhat dot com> <CAAiZkiB2gXHTzxiYT0khkHXsL0m68Rp4Jm4HLdNYj+=X6VKXxA at mail dot gmail dot com> <51780E92 dot 5010904 at redhat dot com>
On 04/24/2013 06:55 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
This "invention" scared me, that's why I didn't even propose it. Anyway,
for the time being I'm going to simply revert what I committed earlier
today. It would be great if somebody can implement the __cplusplus
change as soon as possible.
On 04/24/2013 12:48 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Jason Merrill <email@example.com>
I would really rather avoid introducing another macro to be removed
later. Instead, let's use a value of __cplusplus greater than 201103L,
yes, that makes sense, and even a better path forward.
Hopefully, the next committee draft will have that value.
We won't have a value for the next standard until we have a next
standard, so let's just invent a value for now; presumably people will
know better than to check for that invented value specifically.