On 10/20/14 15:49, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 10/20/14 14:35, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 20/10/14 06:58 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 10/20/14 04:23, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
On 20/10/14 08:36
On 10/20/14 14:35, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 20/10/14 06:58 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 10/20/14 04:23, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
On 20/10/14 08:36, Luca Barbato wrote:
Since gcc-4.7 there is
On 10/20/14 12:21, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
On 10/20/14 12:53 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
GCC 4.7 introduced the new experimental 2011 ISO C++ standard [1], along
with
its GNU variant. This new standard is not the default in GCC 4.7, 4.8
or 4.9,
the default is still gnu++98, but it can be en
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 20/10/14 06:58 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 10/20/14 04:23, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
>>
>> On 20/10/14 08:36, Luca Barbato wrote:
>>> Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 option, do not use
On 10/20/14 12:53 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> GCC 4.7 introduced the new experimental 2011 ISO C++ standard [1], along
> with
> its GNU variant. This new standard is not the default in GCC 4.7, 4.8
> or 4.9,
> the default is still gnu++98, but it can be enabled by passing
> -std=c++11 or
> -std
On 10/19/14 19:08, Alex Xu wrote:
On 19/10/14 06:53 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
the default is still gnu++98
what does this mean, how does it differ from c++98?
Its a gnu dialect. I'm not sure of the details of how it deviates from
the strict standard. I'm more familiar with how c++11 dif
On 10/20/14 04:23, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 20/10/14 08:36, Luca Barbato wrote:
Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 option, do not use it since it
breaks the ABI, resulting in a non-functional system.
Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 optio
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 20/10/14 08:36, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 option, do not use it since it
> breaks the ABI, resulting in a non-functional system.
Since gcc-4.7 there is a -std=c++11 option, do not use it {+yet+}
since it breaks the
On 20/10/14 00:53, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I debated about whether to write a news item about c++11 abi. Usually
> our news items are about some change which requires user intervention.
> But this is just precautionary. With more packages needing c++11
> because of source cha
On 19/10/14 06:53 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> the default is still gnu++98
what does this mean, how does it differ from c++98?
> in the older ABI, can lead to a crippled system.
what do you mean, will other packages break too? maybe "may lead to
non-functioning or possibly broken packages". a
On 10/19/14 18:57, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:53:43 -0400
"Anthony G. Basile" wrote:
we may want to inform users about breakage at the ABI level in case
they do something like add -std=c++11 to their global CXXFLAGS.
You mean tell them they get to keep the pieces?
je
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:53:43 -0400
"Anthony G. Basile" wrote:
> we may want to inform users about breakage at the ABI level in case
> they do something like add -std=c++11 to their global CXXFLAGS.
You mean tell them they get to keep the pieces?
jer
Hi everyone,
I debated about whether to write a news item about c++11 abi. Usually
our news items are about some change which requires user intervention.
But this is just precautionary. With more packages needing c++11
because of source changes, we may want to inform users about breakage at
13 matches
Mail list logo
