ahh yes, i'm using tr1 now in a branch, have to get make_shared going.. moving along!
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 2:57 PM, Dan Wilcox <danomat...@gmail.com> wrote: > I believe the new feature C++11 namespace before it was finalized to std:: > was something like tr1::. You could check the C++ version and set/typdef > the namespace as required. Look in the OpenFrameworks ofConstants.h header. > > > > On Mar 19, 2018, at 10:49 PM, Alex <x37v.a...@gmail.com> wrote: > > using my cmake setup in the jit_expr project I was able to build just now > for 10.9 but no lower, going below 10.9 didn't allow it to find the > std::shared_ptr > maybe I can get lower somehow? Either way, this should be more useful for > more people :) > > Thanks for the info Dan! > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Dan Wilcox <danomat...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Also, if you're targeting C++11, I think you'll have to use a min of at >> least 10.7 (from https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7482026/can-i-use- >> the-latest-features-of-c11-in-xcode-4-or-osx-lion). >> >> One thing we've noticed is that Pd builds on my machine running 10.13 >> don't seems to work on 10.6-10.7 systems, so the deployment target is >> really a suggestion at best. You'll have to do some testing but it's hard >> to hit *everyone* and honestly the vast majority of users fall within the >> newest to maybe 3 versions before anyway (ie. 10.10 - 10.13 now). >> >> For plain C/C++, you can have a relatively old deployment target. It's >> really more important for macOS app development using the Apple frameworks >> ie. stuff like the changes from QT to AVFoundation, etc. >> >> >> On Mar 19, 2018, at 10:07 PM, Dan Wilcox <danomat...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The compiler builds for the current system by default. You have to set >> the min deployment target when building. >> >> Add this flag to you makefile: --mmacosx-version-min=10.6 >> >> The current version for Pd is 10.6 which is the first version that >> supported i386 (ie. Intel processors). >> >> On Mar 19, 2018, at 12:00 PM, pd-dev-requ...@lists.iem.at wrote: >> >> From: Miller Puckette <m...@ucsd.edu> >> To: Alex <x37v.a...@gmail.com> >> Cc: pd-dev <pd-dev@lists.iem.at> >> Subject: Re: [PD-dev] Mac SDK version for externals >> Message-ID: <20180319015755.GY7620@elroy.localdomain> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> This is a very interesting and useful question. >> >> At the outset of PD I only worried about having it run on the "current" >> platforms: Redhat 5.2, Windows 95, and when it arrived, MacOS 10.2. Older >> platforms weren't important. >> >> Since then I've tried to keep back compatibility to whatever those >> bleeding-edge >> OSes were, because I assume people can't always afford machine upgrades. >> But >> I haven't tried to extend Pd (Or "extra" objects) backward past the >> original >> dates. >> >> At the moment I can only compile back to OSX 10.5 (PPC) and Windows XP; I >> don't have real or virtual machines that go back further. >> >> So my suggestion would be: make it work on today's OSes, and try to keep >> it >> alive on them, but don't worry too hard about older ones. I don't think >> I'm >> ever going to be tempted to compile Pd for Windows 3.1. >> >> cheers >> Miller >> >> >> -------- >> Dan Wilcox >> @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika> >> danomatika.com >> robotcowboy.com >> >> >> >> >> -------- >> Dan Wilcox >> @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika> >> danomatika.com >> robotcowboy.com >> >> >> >> > > -------- > Dan Wilcox > @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika> > danomatika.com > robotcowboy.com > > > >
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@lists.iem.at https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
