On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 11:44 AM Jakub Jelinek <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 10:37:44AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 12:06:57AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 03, 2025 at 01:34:28PM -0500, Marek Polacek via Gcc wrote: > > > > I would like us to declare that C++20 is no longer experimental and > > > > change the default dialect to gnu++20. > > > > Defaulting to something that is just a few years old is super > > aggressive, esp. because not many people will test building with > > something else, although we still support it (building a cross with a > > slightly older compiler, for example). > > > > So let's at least not got any further than this! Document that five > > years is the limit, even? > > This is not bumping the minimum version that gcc can be built with, > that stays to be C++14. > This is about what C++ standard g++ uses when users don't specify > any -std= options. > E.g. for C we default to C23, which is 2 years old. For C++ we currently > default to C++17, which is 8 years old.
Just for reference here are when we changed the default: GCC 11: C++17 (+4) GCC 6: C++14 (+2) We went straight from C++98 to C++14 in GCC 6. And yes there were some big differences between C++11 and C++14 (constexpr and generic lambdas to name a few). So changing to C++20 seems to be inline (even a little later) with the other change of the defaults. Thanks, Andrew Pinski
