From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10739 invoked by alias); 20 Oct 2016 19:05:41 -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 10652 invoked by uid 89); 20 Oct 2016 19:05:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=disputes, quantitative, Hx-languages-length:954, risk X-HELO: eggs.gnu.org Received: from eggs.gnu.org (HELO eggs.gnu.org) (208.118.235.92) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 19:05:39 +0000 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bxIeh-0002O5-G3 for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 15:05:37 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:50451) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bxIeh-0002O0-AZ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 15:05:31 -0400 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1773 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bxIef-000249-BA; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 15:05:30 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 19:05:00 -0000 Message-Id: <83d1iuu9i0.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Pedro Alves CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <4300d24a-8711-c5de-79ce-7c530162288c@redhat.com> (message from Pedro Alves on Thu, 20 Oct 2016 18:07:58 +0100) Subject: Re: C++11 (abridged version) Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <4300d24a-8711-c5de-79ce-7c530162288c@redhat.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00611.txt.bz2 > From: Pedro Alves > Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 18:07:58 +0100 > > On #4 (policy for newer standard versions), as I've been saying many > times in the past week, I think that what matters is whether there's > reasonably widespread compiler availability, meaning the latest stable > releases of distributions include a compiler for the standard, or it's > easy to get one by installing some optional package. If reasonably > available, then we should switch, and take advantage of the great work > our compiler and standards friends have been doing. IMO, this is too vague for a policy. I proposed a much more quantitative criterion, one that doesn't run the risk of triggering long disputes with no clear-cut ways of making a decision. I'm okay with other criteria, as long as they are clear, easily applied, and don't require subjective interpretation. My opinion on other items was already voiced here.