Jason,
> On 08/09/2011 09:14 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> I don't think we should define the C++ 2011 value yet. In my opinion, we
>> should wait until:
>> 1) the standard is official
>> 2) gcc implements most of it: people will want to use __cplusplus as a
>> test to know if they can use C++0X features, not if the compiler does
>> some effort to implement half of them.
>
> I'm of two minds about this, but I see that clang and edg still use 199711L
> in C++0x mode, so let's stick with that for now.
with the prerequisite patches now installed, here's the reworked version
of the final patch.
Tested as described for the rest, ok for mainline?
Rainer
2011-03-07 Rainer Orth <r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de>
PR libstdc++/1773
* init.c (cpp_init_builtins): Define __cplusplus 19971L.
# HG changeset patch
# Parent 1751547561d4c2f04c27d9507fb5cd679c6b3eb3
Properly define __cplusplus (PR libstdc++-v3/1773)
diff --git a/libcpp/init.c b/libcpp/init.c
--- a/libcpp/init.c
+++ b/libcpp/init.c
@@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ cpp_init_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile, in
_cpp_define_builtin (pfile, "__STDC__ 1");
if (CPP_OPTION (pfile, cplusplus))
- _cpp_define_builtin (pfile, "__cplusplus 1");
+ _cpp_define_builtin (pfile, "__cplusplus 199711L");
else if (CPP_OPTION (pfile, lang) == CLK_ASM)
_cpp_define_builtin (pfile, "__ASSEMBLER__ 1");
else if (CPP_OPTION (pfile, lang) == CLK_STDC94)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
