Re: C++ in jemalloc

Warner Losh imp at bsdimp.com wrote on Thu Oct 5 21:01:26 UTC 2017 : > Starting in FreeBSD 11, arm and powerpc are supported by clang, > but not super well. For FreeBSD 12, we're getting close for everything > except sparc64 (whose fate has not yet been finally decided). My understanding of the

Re: C++ in jemalloc

I'm guessing a realistic timeline for us would be on the order of 3 to 6 months. We've been dithering on this issue for a while, and your request seems as good a time as any to get people off the fence... So, if you are targeting FreeBSD 12, then in that time frame, there'd be no issues with

Re: C++ in jemalloc

In particular, it is expected that FreeBSD 12 will not ship with GCC 4.2 and that all supported architectures in FreeBSD 12 will be using a C++11-capable toolchain (either external GCC or in-tree clang). However, older releases will still be restricted to C++03 (or whatever GCC 4.2 supports)

Re: C++ in jemalloc

We can avoid it in the short term without a ton of pain. In the long run it would be nice to have, but I wouldn't want to tie our release schedule to FreeBSD's too tightly (our CI is improving to the point where the tip of the dev branch gets tested about as well as releases would be, so we're

Re: C++ in jemalloc

Today C++11 is a no-go generally due to the lagging architectures needing gcc 4.2. However, that answer might change soon. Would it be easy for you to avoid C++11, or would that cause you significant pain? And what's the timeline you'd be releasing a new jemalloc requiring this stuff? The answers

Re: C++ in jemalloc

(apologies if you receive this twice; I subscribed to the list in order to flip the needs-moderation bit for my posts). So it sounds like C++03 (or rather, the version of C++ supported by g++ 4.2) will be fine. Is C++11 a no-go, without breaking libc on non-Clang architectures? (It isn't clear

Re: C++ in jemalloc

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Ian Lepore wrote: > On Thu, 2017-10-05 at 14:01 -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 11:59 AM, David Goldblatt > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > The jemalloc developers have wanted to start using C++ for a while, to

Re: C++ in jemalloc

On Thu, 2017-10-05 at 14:01 -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 11:59 AM, David Goldblatt > wrote: > > > > >  Hi all, > > > > The jemalloc developers have wanted to start using C++ for a while, to > > enable some targeted refactorings of code we have trouble maintaining due > >

Re: C++ in jemalloc

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Warner Losh wrote: > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 11:59 AM, David Goldblatt > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> The jemalloc developers have wanted to start using C++ for a while, to >> enable some targeted refactorings of code we

Re: C++ in jemalloc

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 11:59 AM, David Goldblatt wrote: > Hi all, > > The jemalloc developers have wanted to start using C++ for a while, to > enable some targeted refactorings of code we have trouble maintaining due > to brittleness or complexity (e.g. moving

C++ in jemalloc

Hi all, The jemalloc developers have wanted to start using C++ for a while, to enable some targeted refactorings of code we have trouble maintaining due to brittleness or complexity (e.g. moving thousand line macro definitions to templates, changing the build->extract symbols->rebuild mangling

HEADS-UP: release-releated documentation moving from base to doc repository

Hi, I have expressed my intent to move the release-related documents from the src tree to the doc tree in the past. This has been met with some resistance, but I think this change is far overdue at this point. The primary motivation behind this change is that if there is an error in