Hi,
the bug reminds us to update the documentation about the value of
__cplusplus. I tentatively prepared the below, is it clear enough?
We could probably apply something to the branch too, without the
-std=c++1y bits, thus end simply like '; or @code{201103L}, per the 2011
C++ standard' or more verbosely say that with -std=c++1y too the value
is 201103L.
Thanks,
Paolo.
///////////////////
Index: doc/cpp.texi
===================================================================
--- doc/cpp.texi (revision 199792)
+++ doc/cpp.texi (working copy)
@@ -1926,11 +1926,11 @@ facilities of the standard C library available.
This macro is defined when the C++ compiler is in use. You can use
@code{__cplusplus} to test whether a header is compiled by a C compiler
or a C++ compiler. This macro is similar to @code{__STDC_VERSION__}, in
-that it expands to a version number. A fully conforming implementation
-of the 1998 C++ standard will define this macro to @code{199711L}. The
-GNU C++ compiler is not yet fully conforming, so it uses @code{1}
-instead. It is hoped to complete the implementation of standard C++
-in the near future.
+that it expands to a version number. Depending on the language standard
+selected, the value of the macro is @code{199711L}, as mandated by the
+1998 C++ standard; @code{201103L}, per the 2011 C++ standard; an
+unspecified value strictly larger than @code{201103L} for the experimental
+languages enabled by @option{-std=c++1y} and @option{-std=gnu++1y}.
@item __OBJC__
This macro is defined, with value 1, when the Objective-C compiler is in
