Re: [RFA 09/22] Remove make_cleanup_restore_current_ui

Eli Zaretskii
2016-10-13T06:11:56Z

> Cc: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
> Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 02:28:44 +0100
>
> Yeah, sounds right. I was trying get the gdb::unique_ptr in, in order
> to unblock the cases I suggested you use unique_ptr, but I'm a bit
> confused on what to do about it now... I _think_ people are generally
> OK with it. There was some opposition, but I'm not sure anymore
> whether it still exists. C++11 is now on the table, but maybe a
> staged approach (enable C++11 while supporting C++03 too for a while,
> to catch issues) would make sense anyway.

I still think we shouldn't have workarounds for versions of the
standard older than what we want to support. IOW, if we decide to use
C++11, we should _require_ a compiler that supports it, and error out
if the configure test(s) regarding that fail.

Supporting more than one standard means we will have rarely used code
that is almost never tested, and that means maintenance burden which
threaten to undo at least some part of the benefits you aspire to
achieve by moving to C++ in general and to a new enough C++ standard
in particular.