Vaclav Petras wrote: > > There are no standards for C++ code. > > > > I would say that for GCC, we should go with: > > ‘c++98’‘c++03’ > The 1998 ISO C++ standard plus the 2003 technical corrigendum and some > additional defect reports. Same as -ansi for C++ code. > (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/C-Dialect-Options.html#C-Dialect-Options)
I'd suggest C++98 for C++ code, although whether you can get people to follow it is another matter. The original version of r.terraflow hard-coded the use of g++ in the Makefile. > Hm, I hoped that I missed some -posix in GCC but there is apparently none. > And if you are unsure about that -D options, I don't know how to enforce > the right standards. The precise details are platform-specific. In general, the use of extensions is tolerated more in non-critical modules and less in core libraries and critical modules. -- Glynn Clements <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
