From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17749 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2016 12:16:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 17592 invoked by uid 89); 11 Oct 2016 12:16:44 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=exotic, love, our X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 12:16:42 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1225311658F; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:16:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id qT6k3nxT74Dr; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:16:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D505F116580; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:16:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4D050423DC; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 05:16:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 12:16:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pedro Alves Cc: "Metzger, Markus T" , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce gdb::unique_ptr Message-ID: <20161011121639.GE3813@adacore.com> References: <1476117992-5689-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <1476117992-5689-2-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00250.txt.bz2 > I think it would make a lot of sense to switch to C++11. I'd love > that. rvalue references support, move-aware containers, "auto", > std::unique_ptr and std::shared_ptr would be all very nice to have. > > The only question in my mind is -- are people OK with requiring > gcc 4.8 or later? FWIW, I think it is fine to require C++11 if there are sufficient benefits we can derive from it. This seems like a good example of something we could simplify greatly if we did? Note that I wouldn't necessarily think in purely in terms of which version of GCC supports it, but also consider whether want to support building GDB with non-GCC compilers, particularly on the more exotic systems out there, where it can be hard to build GDB. Do all these compilers support C++11? Probably not. This is where it becomes a judgment call for me. Making it easy to build with other compilers by limiting which parts of the language we can use helps getting wider use of GDB; but on the other hand, if it comes at too much of a cost in terms of the code and its maintenance, then it seems better overall to increase our list of requirements. -- Joel