From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 54001 invoked by alias); 28 Oct 2016 17:26:22 -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 53992 invoked by uid 89); 28 Oct 2016 17:26:21 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Fine, Eli, mentioning, zaretskii 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; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:26:11 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (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 242E06A6CA; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:26:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u9SHQ8ZT020603; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 13:26:09 -0400 Subject: Re: C++11 (abridged version) To: Eli Zaretskii References: <4300d24a-8711-c5de-79ce-7c530162288c@redhat.com> <83d1iuu9i0.fsf@gnu.org> <73e72f21-8acf-1332-08f3-c2c92448c7b8@redhat.com> <5d698ef7-caa8-7130-4413-79c6dcb85f22@redhat.com> <83zilyssjk.fsf@gnu.org> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:26:00 -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: <83zilyssjk.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00818.txt.bz2 On 10/20/2016 08:56 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org >> From: Pedro Alves >> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:41:39 +0100 >> >> Here's a straw man proposal for the policy text: >> >> When is GDB going to start requiring C++NN ? >> >> Our general policy is to wait until the oldest compiler which >> supports C++NN is at least 3 years old. >> >> Rationale: We want to ensure reasonably widespread compiler availability, >> to lower barrier of entry to GDB contributions, and to make it easy for users >> to easily build new GDB on currently supported stable distributions themselves. >> 3 years should be sufficient for latest stable releases of distributions to >> include a compiler for the standard, and/or for new compilers to appear as >> easily installable optional packages. Requiring everyone to build a compiler >> first before building GDB, which would happen if we required a too-new compiler, >> would cause too much inconvenience. >> >> WDYT? > > Fine with me, thanks. > FYI, I've now added this to the coding standards: https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/Internals%20GDB-C-Coding-Standards?action=diff&rev1=19&rev2=20 ... along with mentioning the C++11 requirement. Thanks, Pedro Alves