Re: To be aligned: which C++ dialect for log4cxx

On 14.01.2014 15:47, Pedro Lamarão wrote: > There are no 2003 extensions. > ISO C++ 2003 is the same as ISO C++ 1998 with the incorporation of > various errata. > > Perhaps you are worried about Visual C++ 6. @Pedro Ok, it's true that I was mainly thinking to the tr1 dialect... sorry for the approx

Re: To be aligned: which C++ dialect for log4cxx

Hi, What you really mean by '~restrict'? Is it for some recent releases, or just like forever? And whats the actual root cause to get in to this kind of a problem? regards, *Chand Priyankara* [image: Facebook] [image: LinkedIn]

Re: To be aligned: which C++ dialect for log4cxx

Em 11/01/2014 10:03, Florian Seydoux escreveu: Hi all, a short question: do wee all agree to ~restrict the codebase to ansi C++ (ie. -std=c++98) without 03/11 extension? (despite it's not enforced on gcc compilation) There are no 2003 extensions. ISO C++ 2003 is the same as ISO C++ 1998 with t

Re: What to do with LOGCXX-272 and similar

Guten Tag Florian Seydoux, am Dienstag, 14. Januar 2014 um 07:10 schrieben Sie: > I propose to resolve+close (as Invalid or NotAProblem) such empty entries(?) Agreed, but I would prefer "Won't fix" with a hint that there won't be such a release anymore, but that's just taste. Mit freundlichen Gr