[LLVMdev] Using C++'11 language features in LLVM itself

[Andrew Lenharth]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Justin Holewinski
> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Alright, trying to get this conversation back on track...
> >
> > It seems as though the question to ask is: do the benefits of the C++11
> > features we want outweigh the cost of alienating users of older compilers?
> > For Mac, the question seems almost moot since clang is a fully-supported
> > compiler.  On Linux, it is most often (always?) possible to bootstrap clang
> > or a newer GCC, so a baseline like 4.5/4.6 does not seem unreasonable.
> > Seems like the same should be true for the BSDs.  It may be a bit of work to
> > set up, but it should be a one-time deal.  Once a clang 3.1/3.2 binary is
> > available, all is well.  The problem child, so to speak, is Windows.  I
> > strongly suggest that support for MSVC *not* be dropped.  There are many
> > users out there relying on this support.  That said, I think MSVC 2010 is a
> > reasonable target, at least for 3.3.  And then perhaps move to MSVC 2012 for
> > 3.4.  That should allow for enough time for users to upgrade.
> >
> > So, can we limit ourselves to MSVC 2010-level support for 3.3?
>
> I'm happy with this overall. It will let us get started now, we don't
> need to jump as far as possible right away. And I don't believe anyone
> said that they can't at least use 2010.
>
> We just need a hard decision on minimum supported gcc so we can figure
> out _exactly_ what features we can use.

Any Redhat derivative will be running 4.4, and I tend to run into
redhat derivatives (centos and scientific linux) fairly often at
universities.  Ubuntu 10.04 (LTS) also seems to be 4.4 as does Debian
stable.

Andrew



>
> - Michael Spencer
>
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote:
> >>
> >> "Daniels, Marcus G" <mdaniels at lanl.gov> writes:
> >>
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> It is obvious that you don't develop C++ software on Windows for a
> >> living.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Justin Holewinski
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev