On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 17:00:44 +0200 Murray Cumming <[email protected]> wrote: [snip] > Personally, it feels unwise for Fedora to build everything with > --std=c ++11 if their compiler isn't going to use that by default. > That's going to confuse developers who get weird errors when they > don't specify --std=c++11. It's a bit like how Red Hat used to ship > weirdly patched unstable compiler versions back in the gcc 2.* days. > But anyway, it looks like it's happening.
I don't disagree with the rest of your post, but this is wrong. Using the gcc-5.1 ABI does not require you to compile C++ code with the -std=c++11 flag, and there is no proposal that fedora should do so. >From that point of view the _GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI define is a slight misnomer - the point is that the ABI is compliant with C++11, not that it is only for C++11. The new ABI applies to all flavours of C++ compiled with the default settings for gcc-5.1, including C++98/03 code - there is nothing in C++98 that requires copy on write strings, nor O(N) complexity for std::list::size() - the thing is that C++98 does not prohibit these, whereas C++11 does. I know my earlier posts were somewhat long, but it might be worth reading them, as I explained all this. I also provided some links (which I see also Kalev reproduced for you). Chris _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
