Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 10/20/14 15:49, Anthony G. Basile wrote: On 10/20/14 14:35, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 20/10/14 06:58 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: On 10/20/14 04:23, Alexander Berntsen wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 20/10/14 08:36

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 10/20/14 14:35, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 20/10/14 06:58 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: On 10/20/14 04:23, Alexander Berntsen wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 20/10/14 08:36, Luca Barbato wrote: Since gcc-4.7 there is

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 10/20/14 12:21, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: On 10/20/14 12:53 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: GCC 4.7 introduced the new experimental 2011 ISO C++ standard [1], along with its GNU variant. This new standard is not the default in GCC 4.7, 4.8 or 4.9, the default is still gnu++98, but it can be en

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 20/10/14 06:58 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > On 10/20/14 04:23, Alexander Berntsen wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 >> >> On 20/10/14 08:36, Luca Barbato wrote: >>> Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 option, do not use

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Paweł Hajdan, Jr.
On 10/20/14 12:53 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > GCC 4.7 introduced the new experimental 2011 ISO C++ standard [1], along > with > its GNU variant. This new standard is not the default in GCC 4.7, 4.8 > or 4.9, > the default is still gnu++98, but it can be enabled by passing > -std=c++11 or > -std

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Rich Freeman
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Martin Vaeth wrote: > Anthony G. Basile wrote: >>> Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 option, do not use it {+yet+} >>> since it breaks the ABI, resulting in a non-functional system. >> >> Yes. Eventually we'll have to clear the road for this. > > Isn't Diego ju

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Martin Vaeth
Anthony G. Basile wrote: >> Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 option, do not use it {+yet+} >> since it breaks the ABI, resulting in a non-functional system. > > Yes. Eventually we'll have to clear the road for this. Isn't Diego just starting a gcc-4.9 tinderbox run? It might be worth to try

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 10/20/14 00:59, Duncan wrote: Anthony G. Basile posted on Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:59:41 -0400 as excerpted: On 10/19/14 18:57, Jeroen Roovers wrote: On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:53:43 -0400 "Anthony G. Basile" wrote: we may want to inform users about breakage at the ABI level in case they do somet

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 10/19/14 19:08, Alex Xu wrote: On 19/10/14 06:53 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: the default is still gnu++98 what does this mean, how does it differ from c++98? Its a gnu dialect. I'm not sure of the details of how it deviates from the strict standard. I'm more familiar with how c++11 dif

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 10/20/14 04:23, Alexander Berntsen wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 20/10/14 08:36, Luca Barbato wrote: Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 option, do not use it since it breaks the ABI, resulting in a non-functional system. Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 optio

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-20 Thread Alexander Berntsen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 20/10/14 08:36, Luca Barbato wrote: > Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 option, do not use it since it > breaks the ABI, resulting in a non-functional system. Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 option, do not use it {+yet+} since it breaks the