Regarding OSX, it should plain work. I use c++11 based projects since a while without any issues recognized. Anyway apple clang is based on common clang svn, just with some specials addedas for example xcode integration etc. ..
Jens Am 07.06.2014 um 12:04 schrieb Lukas Tönne <[email protected]>: > It's great to see that C++11 has general support. It would be really > helpful in the depsgraph to deal with closures, among other places. Without > this we'd have to either tediously backport boost implementation (but why > reinvent the wheel?), or use lots of bloated cumbersome type definitions > and C style void* casting (error prone, hides logic). So i'm really happy > that there are no big showstoppers so far. > > > On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Martijn Berger <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> @Campbell I am pretty sure give how hard Apple is pushing out new releases >> and given how many people upgrade that we can just assume an llvm/clang >> 3.0+ feature set for c++11. >> >> I think we should also do this analysis for C99 support and C11 support. >> There are some other projects out there that use C++11 features (clang is >> one) and they have made comprehensive analysis of what features they can >> and do use. >> >> There are some things we can use anyway like noexcept provided we use it >> like the QT people use it so the code does not require a c++11 compiler but >> you do get some benefit from compiling with one ( >> http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5/qtglobal.html#Q_DECL_NOEXCEPT) >> >> I think getting a sort of caniuse.com for c/c++ language features on the >> wiki would be good way forward. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Campbell Barton <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> General +1 to take advantage of C++11 where appropriate, >>> AFAICS OSX needs some investigation?, otherwise we're close to being >>> able to support it. >>> >>> >>> @Tom M: I'm not concerned with static checking tools, mainly because >>> using C++11 in a few places won't suddenly make static checkers fail >>> on the rest of our code, eventually they will get updated too. >>> >>> Coverity has support: >>> https://communities.coverity.com/docs/DOC-1571 >>> clang-static-analyser didn't work well for me last I checked with C++, >>> but it might have improved in last year or so. >>> >>> >>> @Ichthyo: Not being able to build Blender on older Linux isnt such a >>> big deal since Blender can still run on them, if its important they >>> can get a new compiler (I did this on a CentOS server, compiling a >>> newer GCC/Clang isnt that big of a deal). >>> >>> >>> @Jeffrey H: C++11 doesn't raise hardware requirements. >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Jeffrey H <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> What about older hardware? I don't know much about C++11, but I would >>>> imagine it takes advantage of newer processor instruction sets and I >> know >>>> new compilers do the same. Would Blender still run on, say, an old >>> Pentium >>>> 4? The reason I ask is simply because a large number of users use >> Blender >>>> because it's able to run on the proverbial toaster, where Maya and >> other >>>> programs cannot. Is this actually an issue or am I just making stuff >> up? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Ichthyostega <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Am 06.06.2014 17:54, schrieb Sergey Sharybin: >>>>>> Why it might be useful? >>>>> >>>>>> C++11 brings some neat syntax and STD library extensions. >>>>> >>>>> ..plus the benefit you can get from using functors / closures wisely. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Downside is that we have to cut off some platforms / compilers. >>>>> >>>>> Basically we need GCC >= 4.7 and Clang >= 3.0 >>>>> >>>>> And anything below that will not be supported anymore. >>>>> Like RedHat Enterprise Linux. :-P >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sounds like something for Blender 2.8.x >>>>> >>>>> --Ichthyo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Bf-committers mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jeffrey "Italic_" Hoover >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Bf-committers mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> - Campbell >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bf-committers mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bf-committers mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >> > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers _____________________________________ Jens Verwiebe Allerskehre 44 - 22309 Hamburg Tel.: +49 40 68 78 50 mobil: +49 172 400 49 07 mailto: [email protected] web: http://www.jensverwiebe.de _____________________________________ _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
