On Tue, 04 Apr 2017 18:13:46 +0200 Murray Cumming <murr...@murrayc.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2017-04-04 at 15:09 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On 4 April 2017 at 14:52, Murray Cumming wrote: > > > Any ideas about how we should support C++17 in gtkmm-3.0 without > > > losing > > > C++11/14 compatibility and without breaking ABI? > > > > Replace all dynamic exception specifications with noexcept(false) > > (or just no exception specification). That's not an ABI change. > > That's great to know. I'll take care of that then.
I would check that. It didn't affect ABI in C++11/14, but I am not so sure about C++17. According to http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/noexcept_spec, in C++17 "The noexcept-specification is a part of the function type and may appear as part of any function declarator." If it is part of the type then it might feature in name mangling, so this is worth checking with the compiler writers. _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list gtkmm-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
