On 12/4/2013 4:44 AM, Povilas Kanapickas wrote: > There was a proposal to move to C++11 in April [1]. In the end, Wayne > suggested[2] that we should wait until major Linux distributions ship > with a (mostly) C++11-compliant compiler, so the proposal was not > adopted. I think it may be worthwhile to revisit the issue. > > All major Linux distributions already ship GCC-4.8 as the default compiler: > > Debian testing: GCC 4.8.1 [3] > Debian unstable: GCC 4.8.1 [3] > Ubuntu 13.10: GCC 4.8.1 [4] > Opensuse 13.1: GCC 4.8.? [5] > Fedora 19: GCC 4.8.2 [6] > > According to wikimedia stats[7] the above distributions cover >98% of > the market. > > The list is for the newest releases, older releases will use older > complilers of course. Presumably, the users who stick to these older > releases want stability and won't update to bleeding-edge KiCad anyway. > Thus I think they are not very important as far as this proposal is > concerned.
This is why I'm still not concerned. See: http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/cxx0x_status.html. Notice the word "experimental". Also notice that in order to use C++11 support, the options -std=c++11 or -std=gnu++11 must be used. KiCad builds do not set either of these options so unless you are setting them by environment variable or when running CMake, you are not compiling to C++11. When GCC makes C++11 the default setting, then I'll be a bit more concerned. FYI, GCC does not even default to C++0x which has been a standard for how long? I'm not suggesting that C++11 isn't useful, I just think your jumping the gun by about 10 years given the glacial pace at which C++ language changes actually become the default implementation. > > Any opinions? In the future, I suggest you refrain from using terms like "modern programming practices" when trying to convince developers (at least this developer anyway) that the change you are proposing is worthwhile. This is an automatic red flag for me. It sounds like a bunch of marketing hype rather than a well thought out technical argument. While I agree std::xxxx is more readable than using namespaces, there is nothing "modern" about writing readable code. Good coding practices have been around since "good old days" of assembly and C. Over the last 25 years, I've seen just about every over hyped new coding technique that was going to radically change the way code was written come and go. In the end, it always comes back to good coding practices. Regards, Wayne > > Regards, > Povilas > > [1]: https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg10091.html > [2]: https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg10120.html > > [3]: > http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=gcc&searchon=names&suite=all§ion=all > [4]: > http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=gcc&searchon=names&suite=all§ion=all > [5]: http://software.opensuse.org/package/gcc > [6]: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/gcc-c++ > [7]: > http://stats.wikimedia.org/archive/squid_reports/2013-10/SquidReportOperatingSystems.htm > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
