On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Sean Silva <chisophu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Richard Smith via cfe-commits < > cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hi all! >> >> I'd like to establish a policy for Clang's default language standard (if >> none is specified with -std), as follows: >> >> Clang defaults to the most recent published standard for the selected >> language that it fully implements. >> >> The practical impact of this is that clang++ will default to C++14 for >> C++ compilations (for version 3.9 onwards) and will default to C++17 once >> our implementation support is complete and the standard is published >> (whichever happens later). >> >> I'd suggest that we apply the same policy for clang-cl, but if it's >> important that we enable a not-yet-fully-implemented standard for cl >> compatibility, that seems reasonable. >> >> The question of whether the default mode for the GCC-compatible driver >> should be -std=gnuXXX or -std=cXXX is separate, but also likely worth >> discussing. Enabling GNU keywords by default is a very odd choice, and if >> we believe we can change our defaults without breaking the world then this >> seems like a good time to do so. >> > > Using cXXX instead of gnuXXX would break the world on PS4. So for sure > with `-std=c++latest` we would end up proposing a patch to change this for > the PS4 target to gnu++latest (or gnu++11 if gnu++latest is not feasible). > OK. Out of interest, is it the GNU keywords that you need, or some other effect of the difference between modes? > (As I'm sure you're aware, we have pending to upstream a patch that makes > -std=gnu++11 the default C++ language mode on PS4 (just blocked on fixing > tests to not assume the existing std)). > > It may be feasible for us to use a "-std=gnu++latest" behavior and not > have to have a PS4-specific default; CC'ing Warren and Paul. > > -- Sean Silva > > >> >> I also intend to make explicit in our documentation that our -std=XXX >> flag enables the selected standard, *plus all relevant issues in Defect >> Report status from the relevant language committee* (it doesn't make sense >> to support a language without its bugfixes). >> >> Thoughts? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cfe-commits mailing list >> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >> >> >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
