FYI: bullseye/stable: GCC 10.2 buster/oldstable: GCC 8.3 stretch: GCC 6.3
So C++11 should have been the default in the last three Debian major releases. I agree that backing out the nullptr use is the best course of action irrespective of any other considerations. Kind regards, Roger > -----Original Message----- > From: Cantor, Scott <canto...@osu.edu> > Sent: 19 October 2022 14:33 > To: c-dev@xerces.apache.org > Subject: Re: Probably a 3.2.5 fix coming > > On 10/19/22, 9:29 AM, "Robert Hairgrove" > <evorgri...@hispeed.ch.INVALID> wrote: > > > However, it is not the default compile mode until GCC 6.1, so it would > > have to be enabled with the `-std=c++11` command-line option. > > That is not what is observed. I built it clean on Debian, without any override > of that flag. So there's something else going on for a particular build, and > g++ > claims it uses a baseline that's past 2011. It may not be 100% standard, but > it's enough to get nullptr to work. > > > Many projects, Qt for example, replaced all pointer 0's with `nullptr` > > sometime between 5.12 and 5.15, so perhaps it wouldn't be such a > > bad thing just to leave `nullptr` in there? > > There are insufficient resources to do things like that and risk breakage. It > needs to build regardless so canaries are not something this project can > afford. If it was a live code base, I probably would agree. > > > If there ever is another major > > release, I think this should be used instead of `0` (or `NULL`?? > > There will never be another major release unless something substantially > changes. Or a minor. > > -- Scott > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: c-dev-unsubscr...@xerces.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: c-dev-h...@xerces.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: c-dev-unsubscr...@xerces.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: c-dev-h...@xerces.apache.org
