ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Igor Sapego <isap...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Update our C++ library to C++11 standard
Date Mon, 12 Nov 2018 10:39:00 GMT
Vladimir,

I'd wish we could do that, but unfortunately, even VS 2017 does not
support all C++11 (and even C++03) features [1]. So, maybe we should
also speak about dropping support of old VS and moving to at least VS 2012.

You can find the benefits of this at [2]. For example, this will give us
native support of atomics, fences, threads and also better language
features,
that can help a lot when developing API and help finding bugs during
compilation.

If we will adopt the "limited C++11" approach, then I believe we will need
to
update our API to make it more modern and convenient for C++11 users.

But, unfortunately, this won't give us the complete support of C++11.

Something else we should also consider here, is that C++ community can be
very conservative, so some part of community could still be on C++03.

[1] -
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/visual-cpp-language-conformance?view=vs-2017
[2] - https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-gb/library/hh567368.aspx

Best Regards,
Igor

On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:28 AM Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com>
wrote:

> Igniters,
>
> Over time we were very conservative about language levels for our libraries
> to be able to target wider platforms. But it looks like some of them are
> way too old, what doing more harm than good.
>
> For C++ we still use C++03 standard, which 15 years old. C++11, C++15 and
> C++17 were released since then. I propose to plan upgrade to C++11 version
> at least. May be event C++15. Major improvements in C++11:
>
> 1) Standard threading model - we will be able to remove a lot
> platform-dependent code (atomics, shared pointers, etc)
> 2) Rvalues - most probably we will be able to benefit from move semantics
> in terms of both performance and cleaner API
> 3) Lambdas - this needs to be investigated, but may be we will be able to
> integrate them into our compute API.
>
> If agreed we should plan it to AI 3.0 release, since this is a breaking
> change.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Vladimir.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message