On Sat, Sep 14, 2024, 11:37 AM Andrew Pinski via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 8:53 AM Jason Merrill via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> > wrote: > > > > We moved to a bootstrap requirement of C++11 in GCC 11, 8 years after > > support was stable in GCC 4.8. > > > > It is now 8 years since C++14 was the default mode in GCC 6 (and 9 years > > since support was complete in GCC 5); perhaps it's time to update? > > > > IIRC I've previously suggested this in response to a couple of different > > patches that could have been simplified in C++14, but am failing to find > > those messages now. > > I think C++14 is a good idea. The biggest cleanup area that might/will > happen is in use of constexpr. Since constexpr functions with C++11 > limited what could be done. I know we have mentioned this before but I > can't find it either. > I think it's a win for GCC code but please document the minimum GCC version. When building RTEMS tools on older host OSes, I sometimes find myself having to guess what the best version to use is and how to step from say GCC 4 to it. Luckily CentOS 7 has the software collections to get newer Python and GCC, but it's harder on other hosts. > > I see the functions/methods in bbitmap.h definitely could be improved > with going to C++14. > > Thanks, > Andrew > > > > > > Jason > --joel >
