On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Cody Permann wrote: > No garbage collection expands compatibility a lot? I'm on my phone > so I can't easily check, but I thought the smart pointers were all > well supported in some of the earlier versions of C++11 compilers. > They are really handy and I'm not sure if your garbage collection > line includes them or not.
It doesn't. We *definitely* want the new smart pointers. The garbage collection stuff is here: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2670.htm And other than as (standard-allowed!) no-ops there doesn't seem to be much love for it among implementors. > Your compiler versions are so close to ours (MOOSE), that for greedy > reasons I'd enjoy seeing parity between them to ease testing and > integration. If no others are stuck on a small minor or patch > release, perhaps we could reconcile that before taking the plunge. > See our minimum compilers at the top of this link: > http://mooseframework.org/getting-started/ I think we've got RHEL 7 people to support... which apparently has released updates to gcc all the way to 4.8.5? I was under the impression that they were stuck on 4.8.2 for some reason. Your Intel version is 14.0? That seems to support everything except the new alignment stuff, inheriting constructors, user-defined literals... and a *bunch* of multithreading standards. We've got working alternatives in the threading cases, I could forgo inheriting constructors, and I'm not interested in micromanaging alignment or defining our own literals, so 14.0 sounds reasonable, as long as you guys are doing the CI for it. --- Roy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Libmesh-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users
