================ @@ -16,7 +16,8 @@ #define _NULLPTR_T #ifdef __cplusplus -#if defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED) +#if __cplusplus >= 201103L || \ + (defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED)) ---------------- philnik777 wrote:
> > yeah, I'm OK with it. I just wish we could go all the way. > > +1, but it might be a challenge too. I'm not certain libc++ _should_ provide > `nullptr_t` in C++03 mode; We claim to be a C++11 implementation, not a C++03 implementation. Just one that mostly works with `-std=c++03`. Whether that was the right thing to do is debatable, but it's where we are today. > that's taking an identifier from the user in that language mode and `nullptr` > doesn't work in C++03 anyway: https://godbolt.org/z/96vMdbobe Well, it does with libc++. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154599 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
