[PATCH] Enable C++11

[Chandler Carruth]

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 4:36 PM, David Fang <fang at csl.cornell.edu> wrote:

> The proposed patch can just be taken as a reminder that we're post-3.4 and
>> thinking about this seriously now. I think some developers are still using
>> old compilers day to day.
>>
>
> I'm not opposed to moving towards C++11-izing, and there's been some fair
> warning.  I've been maintaining a gcc-4.0-friendly [powerpc-darwin8] branch
> in the hopes of creating a bootstrappable clang with 'acceptable' quality
> codegen, enough to self-host with current libc++.  [see my post to llvmdev
> a few days ago on the status of this -- a lot has improved recently.]
>
> I ask that introducing actual C++11 code into the source tree be held off
> "a little longer" so that I might have a window of stability where I can
> build a working C++11 clang/libc++ starting with (system) gcc-4.0.  Once
> that is achieved, this unofficial release (3.something-between-4-and-5) can
> be used to start future bootstraps of llvm/clang that require C++11.
>
> It would be really nice to not require a bootstrap of gcc-4.8 for stage-1
> clang, but FSF gcc-4.8 give me unresolved issues on powerpc-darwin8.  I'd
> rather focus my limited time on in-tree issues in llvm/clang.  It's already
> a small chore maintaining this long-lived branch.
>
> Anyways, that's my $0.025.  Please consider this wish before landing that
> first C++11-ized patch?


Is there a particular reason you can't use the 3.4 release branch for this?
That was the goal of waiting until now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140106/8ec2f3ae/attachment.html>