<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 1:49 AM Jonas Toth via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>+1 for keeping up to date :)<br>
</p>
<p>Should the policy say something about old code as well?</p>
<p>Do we consider it as good/reasonable to modernize our code once
the new standards are allowed?<br>
I am thinking of clang-tidy modernization as an approach to
modernize automatically and reduce manual burden.<br>
In general we aim for a consistent style in the code-base and a
view words regarding this issue would be interesting in my
opinion.</p></div></blockquote><div>I think the coding standards used with new code should be a very separate discussion. While the motivation here is about moving to C++14 and/or C++17, what is actually being discussed is just the host toolchain, as that is the part that requires tooling and other mechanical things we need to get right along side any policy. (It also has much more impact on the library *users* IMO, as opposed to primarily impacting LLVM *developers*. While these overlap, they're not the same.)</div><div><br></div><div>I'd have a separate discussion about establishing coding standards and actually updating the language standard when we have toolchains in place that support it.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Best, Jonas<br>
</p>
<div class="gmail-m_-4264825289329728821moz-cite-prefix">Am 17.01.19 um 00:35 schrieb JF Bastien
via llvm-dev:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
Hi C++ enthusiasts!
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It’s a new year, so let’s try a new approach in
getting LLVM’s codebase past C++11. Instead of discussing
toolchain versions and whether C++14 or 17 is best, let’s just
focus on one baby step: agreeing on a policy. This policy will
be used to update our toolchain, hopefully warning people in
LLVM 8 and actually moving past C++11 for LLVM 9.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Good news! I believe we already have agreement on
this policy. I went through all the discussions (again) and I
think I captured everyone’s points of view and concerns. Here
are the discussions: </div>
<div>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://llvm.org/devmtg/2018-10/talk-abstracts.html#bof3" target="_blank">LLVM dev meeting 2018 BoF
"Migrating to C++14, and beyond!"</a></li>
<li><a href="http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-May/123238.html" target="_blank">A Short Policy Proposal
Regarding Host Compilers</a></li>
<li><a href="http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-May/123182.html" target="_blank">Using C++14 code in LLVM
(2018)</a></li>
<li><a href="http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-October/118673.html" target="_blank">Using C++14 code in LLVM
(2017)</a></li>
<li><a href="http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-October/105483.html" target="_blank">Using C++14 code in LLVM
(2016)</a></li>
<li><a href="http://llvm.org/D47073" target="_blank">Document and Enforce new Host
Compiler Policy</a></li>
<li><a href="http://llvm.org/D46723" target="_blank">Require GCC 5.1 and LLVM 3.5 at a
minimum</a></li>
</ul>
When replying to this email, please avoid having the same
discussions again. Please provide references to anything I might
have missed. If you’re making a new point, say so. And don’t
assume ill-will, I’m just trying to get us off C++11.</div>
<div><br>
I have a patch for you to review: <a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D56819" target="_blank">https://reviews.llvm.org/D56819</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Here’s what it currently says our policy should be:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font size="1" face="Courier">+We intend to
require newer toolchains as time goes by. This means LLVM's<br>
+codebase can use newer versions of C++ as they get
standardized. Requiring newer<br>
+toolchains to build LLVM can be painful for those building
LLVM, it will<br>
+therefore only be done through the following process:<br>
+<br>
+ * Generally, try to support LLVM and GCC versions from the
last 3 years at a<br>
+ minimum. This time-based guideline is not strict: we may
support much older<br>
+ compilers, or decide to support fewer ones.<br>
+<br>
+ * An RFC is sent to the `llvm-dev mailing list <<a href="http://lists.llvm.org/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a>>`_<br>
+<br>
+ - Detail upsides of the version increase (e.g. allow LLVM
to use newer C++<br>
+ language or library features; avoid miscompiles in
particular compiler<br>
+ versions, etc).<br>
+ - Detail downsides on important platforms (e.g. Ubuntu
LTS status).<br>
+<br>
+ * Once the RFC reaches consensus, update the CMake
toolchain version checks<br>
+ and this document. We want to soft-error when developers
compile LLVM. We<br>
+ say "soft-error" because the error can be turned into a
warning using a<br>
+ CMake flag. This is an important step: LLVM still doesn't
have code which<br>
+ requires the new toolchains, but it soon will. If you
compile LLVM but don't<br>
+ read the mailing list, we should tell you!<br>
+<br>
+ * Ensure that at least one LLVM release has had this
soft-error. Not all<br>
+ developers compile LLVM tip-of-tree. These release-bound
developers should<br>
+ also be told about upcoming changes.<br>
+<br>
+ * Turn the soft-error into a hard-error after said LLVM
release has branched.<br>
+<br>
+ * Update the :doc:`coding standards<CodingStandards>`
to explicitly allow the<br>
+ new features we've now unlocked.<br>
+<br>
+ * Start using the new features in LLVM's codebase.</font><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>JF</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="gmail-m_-4264825289329728821mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="gmail-m_-4264825289329728821moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
<a class="gmail-m_-4264825289329728821moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>
<a class="gmail-m_-4264825289329728821moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>