From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 130557 invoked by alias); 12 Oct 2016 11:15:56 -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 130541 invoked by uid 89); 12 Oct 2016 11:15:55 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=theyd, his, shipped, our X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 11:15:54 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C7CA63E12; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 11:15:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u9CBFo5Y007342; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 07:15:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce gdb::unique_ptr To: Eli Zaretskii References: <1476117992-5689-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <1476117992-5689-2-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <20161011121639.GE3813@adacore.com> <68fc02cb-59bc-012c-d1be-b5ed2076d6a5@redhat.com> <20161011144741.GF3813@adacore.com> <83insydifw.fsf@gnu.org> <83a8eadds7.fsf@gnu.org> <4d49eb8f-5a0c-1e7e-d082-1a224179184f@redhat.com> <831szmd977.fsf@gnu.org> <83vawybol4.fsf@gnu.org> <6ba388f7-1696-42db-ae92-23df79e3ba11@redhat.com> <83oa2qaxe7.fsf@gnu.org> <83fuo1c02j.fsf@gnu.org> Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, markus.t.metzger@intel.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 11:15:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83fuo1c02j.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00299.txt.bz2 On 10/12/2016 11:51 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Would you please refrain from labeling my (or anyone else's) arguments > with derogatory labels? Please always assume that anything like that > is due to some misunderstanding, not to anything else. Will do, if you also start assuming good faith on my part. > I have no reason to be sure that was tongue-in-cheek. And I have no > reason to regard as obvious that no one will be requiring C++17 any > time soon, not without anyone, nor our coding standards, saying that. > > So from my POV, that was no straw man argument at all. Jan is one of > the more influential developers here, so his opinions certainly have a > significant weight with me. I regard things that he writes very > seriously. OK. I'll take that in consideration. >> Fact: Nowhere did he say that we will now require GCC 6.1. > > Not directly, no. But C++14 is not fully supported until GCC 5, > AFAIK, so who knows what C++17 might mean; it certainly does mean a > new enough GCC version, possibly GCC 6 or newer. Thus my reaction. I think worrying about language version requirements is seeing it backwards from what we should be looking at. IMO, we should be looking at the distribution sphere (and the distro versions people are likely to be using/developing on, e.g., latest Ubuntu LTS, past couple Fedora releases, etc.), and check what are the compiler versions that are shipped in them, either by default or as optional packages. And then from that, decide which most up to date language version / features we can require (if we'd really want to use them). I.e., if in 5 years, virtually everyone has convenient access to an C++14 compiler, why not make use of C++14 features if they'd make our lives easier? Thanks, Pedro Alves