On 9/30/19 1:50 PM, Nicholas Krause wrote:
Greetings Jonathan and Jason,
I was wondering what work is required to move to C++11. Seems your
both interested in getting this done and so am I. Perhaps we start
similar to Git with a wiki page about what features would be useful
and then start m
Greetings Jonathan and Jason,
I was wondering what work is required to move to C++11. Seems your
both interested in getting this done and so am I. Perhaps we start
similar to Git with a wiki page about what features would be useful
and then start migrating the makefiles to allow for this.
So
Greetings David,
I posted on the list about moving to C++11/C11 but the focus was on
C++11 for my work. Seems that other people wanted to use some
parts of the C++11 standard including rvalues,move,auto and template
aliases. The thread is here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2019-09/msg00228
On 9/26/19, Nicholas Krause wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I asked about moving to C/C++ 11 as it would make it easier to
>
> allow multithreading support due to having a memory model
>
> alongside other features. Jason Merill mentioned due to it
>
> being so common it may be a good time to.
>
> Moving
On 9/26/19 9:08 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> Note the main issue is host compiler support. I'm not sure if C++11 would
> be the step we'd gain most - for some hashtable issues I'd have needed
> std::move support for example. There's always the possibility to
> require an intermediate step (first
Tom Tromey writes:
>> "Jason" == Jason Merrill writes:
>
> Jason> Note that std::move is from C++11.
>
>>> I'm not too worried about requiring even a C++14 compiler, for the
>>> set of products we still release latest compilers we have newer
>>> GCCs available we can use for building them (ev
> "Jason" == Jason Merrill writes:
Jason> Note that std::move is from C++11.
>> I'm not too worried about requiring even a C++14 compiler, for the
>> set of products we still release latest compilers we have newer
>> GCCs available we can use for building them (even if those are
>> not our p
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 4:08 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 9:23 AM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 05:10 Nicholas Krause, wrote:
> > >
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > I asked about moving to C/C++ 11 as it would make it easier to
> > >
> > > allow multithreading
On 9/26/19 4:08 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 9:23 AM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 05:10 Nicholas Krause, wrote:
Greetings,
I asked about moving to C/C++ 11 as it would make it easier to
allow multithreading support due to having a memory model
alongsid
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 9:23 AM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 05:10 Nicholas Krause, wrote:
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I asked about moving to C/C++ 11 as it would make it easier to
> >
> > allow multithreading support due to having a memory model
> >
> > alongside other feature
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 05:10 Nicholas Krause, wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> I asked about moving to C/C++ 11 as it would make it easier to
>
> allow multithreading support due to having a memory model
>
> alongside other features. Jason Merill mentioned due to it
>
> being so common it may be a good ti
Greetings,
I asked about moving to C/C++ 11 as it would make it easier to
allow multithreading support due to having a memory model
alongside other features. Jason Merill mentioned due to it
being so common it may be a good time to.
Moving to git seems to be universally agree on so I'm openi
12 matches
Mail list logo
