Are there any vendors for whom this would cause an issue? Else, I would vote for moving things forward
On 10 August 2017 at 10:18, Larry Gritz <l...@larrygritz.com> wrote: > Ugh, so it's worse than I thought. > > I suppose I'm willing to fix and submit a patch to address this. > > Do I need to put in the proper macros to make it compile on everything > from C++03 through 17? Does anybody want to argue for continuing to > maintain C++03 compatibility for future OpenEXR releases, or is it finally > time (six years after the C++ standard and 2+ years after VFXPlatform) to > raise the floor to C++11? > > -- lg > > > On Aug 9, 2017, at 11:38 PM, Werner Benger <wer...@cct.lsu.edu> wrote: > > It should be noted that dynamic expressions are actually forbidden in > C++17, so OpenEXR does no longer compile with GCC 7.1 when std C++17 is > enabled. The highest C++ version that can be used to compile it is C++14, > where it's still just a warning, while in C++17 it's an error. It would be > good to have OpenEXR at least compilable in C++17. Major C++ libraries > such as QT are using C++11 nowadays, so it seems pretty safe to go beyond > C++03 for modern applications, a lot of things are indeed much easier. > > Werner > > > On 10.08.2017 00:20, Larry Gritz wrote: > > In a test compile with gcc 7, I get lots of errors of the following ilk: > > /home/travis/build/lgritz/openexr/IlmBase/Imath/ImathVec.h:228:34: > warning: dynamic exception specifications are deprecated in C++11 > [-Wdeprecated] > const Vec2 & normalizeExc () throw (IEX_NAMESPACE::MathExc); > ^~~~~ > > I can disable this particular warning, of course, but it's worth noting > that the OpenEXR code base is not C++11 compliant. But in addition to using > some C++03 idioms that are deprecated in C++11, perhaps more importantly, > the code is not taking advantage of new features such as move semantics, > constexpr, nothrow, and others. For the Imath classes especially, using > some of these may actually confer a performance benefit. > > I feel kind of bad pointing this out while not really having the time at > the moment to code up and submit an actual patch myself, but I thought I'd > at least open the topic and see where the community stands on the issue of > how and when to upgrade to C++11 and if it's important for modern OpenEXR > to continue to support C++03. For point of reference, the VFX Reference > Platform [http://www.vfxplatform.com/] dictated C++11 for 2016 and 2017, > and will be C++14 for 2018. > > -- lg > > -- > Larry Gritz > l...@larrygritz.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openexr-devel mailing list > Openexr-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel > > > -- > ____________________________________________________________ > _______________ > Dr. Werner Benger Visualization Research > Center for Computation & Technology at Louisiana State University (CCT/LSU) > 2019 Digital Media Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803 > Tel.: +1 225 578 4809 <(225)%20578-4809> Fax.: +1 > 225 578-5362 <(225)%20578-5362> > > > _______________________________________________ > Openexr-devel mailing list > Openexr-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel > > > -- > Larry Gritz > l...@larrygritz.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openexr-devel mailing list > Openexr-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel > >
_______________________________________________ Openexr-devel mailing list Openexr-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel
