https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99058
--- Comment #8 from Brad Spencer <bspencer at blackberry dot com> --- Everything you've said makes sense to me. The proposed documentation changes would help a lot. IMO, they are a good idea and would have helped (and will continue to help) me. I agree that the C++11/14/17 status page for libstdc++ and the compiler itself) are great places to document the version of GCC at which those features became stable. BTW, the compiler's own C++ status page seems to make some statements that, while perhaps not technically contradictory, might be misleading, or at least confusing when taken together with your new doc changes. For example: https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-status.html#cxx11 "GCC 4.8.1 was the first feature-complete implementation of the 2011 C++ standard" That's probably true, but the information that you wrote in the new diff is more important to a typical GCC user. Perhaps this should also state when C++11 became stable? The compiler's C++14 section doesn't list a version, and its C++17 section says "C++17 features are available since GCC 5". (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7) > > +GCC 5.1 was the first release with non-experimental C++11 support, > > +so the API and ABI of C++11 components is only stable from that release on. > > Maybe this should say "of new C++11 components" (and similarly in the other > sections) to make it clear that it only applies to features added by C++11, > and not everything in the C++11 status table. Perhaps "so the API and ABI of components added in C++11"? Thanks again for explaining this in detail and for the changes.
