[cfe-dev] Setting default dialect to C++11

[Martin J. O'Riordan via cfe-dev]

>From the “Subject” and earlier messages in this thread, it would appear that the proposed default Standard is C++11; but the words in this message and a few other messages seem to suggest that the proposed default Standard is C++14.

 

I’m just curious about the proposed default, is it to be C++11 or C++14?  I don’t have any argument against changing the default to either, but would like to know what is really being proposed.

 

Thanks,

 

            MartinO

 

From: cfe-dev [mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Richard Smith via cfe-dev
Sent: 19 May 2017 18:12
To: Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com>
Cc: Clang Dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] Setting default dialect to C++11

 

On 18 May 2017 11:18 pm, "Robinson, Paul" <paul.robinson at sony.com <mailto:paul.robinson at sony.com> > wrote:

Not to forget that Charles Li did a pile of work over the past year or so to tidy up a lot of the tests.  Given that the PS4 target already defaults to C++11, I should hope there would be little left to do.

Right, and indeed we have buildbots that test that a C++11 default works. So the remaining cleanups would be for C++14-specific issues, which should be minimal in comparison to the great work Charles did.

--paulr

 

From: cfe-dev [mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> ] On Behalf Of Richard Smith via cfe-dev
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 8:30 PM
To: Tim Northover
Cc: cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> 


Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] Setting default dialect to C++11

 

On 18 May 2017 at 19:38, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com <mailto:t.p.northover at gmail.com> > wrote:

On 18 May 2017 at 18:56, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk <mailto:richard at metafoo.co.uk> > wrote:
> Agreed. I think there's sufficient (although not unanimous) agreement that
> we should increase our default language standard; what we need is for
> someone to work through the immediate fallout from doing so (particularly in
> the test suite).

I'll see what I can do tomorrow. Hopefully I can at least get some
numbers here by the end of the day. Possibly patches; what's our
preferred solution to failures: fix the code (within reason), or
-std=c++98?

 

If the difference is interesting, test it in both modes. If the test is C++98-specific or has uninteresting diagnostic differences, -std=c++98.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20170521/37072a87/attachment.html>