From dev-return-8078-apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive=stdcxx.apache.org@stdcxx.apache.org Tue Jul 01 15:10:30 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 4657 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2008 15:10:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Jul 2008 15:10:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 38919 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jul 2008 15:10:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive@stdcxx.apache.org Received: (qmail 38902 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jul 2008 15:10:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@stdcxx.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@stdcxx.apache.org Received: (qmail 38891 invoked by uid 99); 1 Jul 2008 15:10:31 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Jul 2008 08:10:31 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [208.30.140.160] (HELO moroha.roguewave.com) (208.30.140.160) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:09:41 +0000 Received: from exchmail01.Blue.Roguewave.Com (exchmail01.blue.roguewave.com [10.22.129.22]) by moroha.roguewave.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m61FA1J6002464 for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:10:01 GMT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: C++ 0x testing Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:09:17 -0600 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: C++ 0x testing Thread-Index: AcjbFAaTK9GgY+vZSAqe2UmjCyYO5AAdtD+Q References: <486955F9.3080205@roguewave.com> <48697E6C.20104@roguewave.com> From: "Eric Lemings" To: X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Sebor [mailto:msebor@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor > Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 6:47 PM > To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org > Subject: Re: C++ 0x testing >=20 > Eric Lemings wrote: > > =20 ... > > Anyways, > > the gcc.config flag appends the appropriate compiler flags and > > defines only if this make variable is defined; e.g. > >=20 > > ifeq ($(_RWSTD_EXT_CXX_0X),1) > > CXXFLAGS +=3D -std=3Dgnu++0x -D_RWSTD_EXT_CXX_0X > > endif >=20 > I'm suggesting we unconditionally enable it on 4.3.x in builds > with gcc 4.3 (and all other compilers where it's intended to > be tested). IIUC, the approach outlined above won't help us test > the implementation in nightly builds because it'll still leave > C++ 0x disabled unless we also change the buildntest script to > define the make variable the way you show. If we were to take > this approach I don't see the advantage over simply setting > CXXOPTS=3D-std=3Dgnu++0x instead. It seems to me that most users > are more likely to be familiar and comfortable with using > compiler options than with #defining our config macros. My thought is that since 4.3.0 will be released (we hope) long before the C++0x standard even reaches FCD status (much less be ratified about a year later), the C++0x extensions would be disabled by default. In the 5.0.0 release, which should occur somewhat simultaneous with ratification of the standard, C++0x conformance would be enabled by default. As for testing C++0x in the 4.3.x branch, we would just have to modify the nightly build and test scripts. You don't think we should bother testing gcc 4.3.x builds WITHOUT the C++0x extensions? Brad.