Hi List, I just wanted to write to ask what if any update / new thoughts anyone has about C++11.
Previously there was some discussion here: https://mail.gna.org/public/wesnoth-dev/2014-02/msg00069.html https://mail.gna.org/public/wesnoth-dev/2014-02/msg00071.html https://mail.gna.org/public/wesnoth-dev/2014-05/msg00002.html https://mail.gna.org/public/wesnoth-dev/2014-05/msg00004.html Regarding the first set: - Did anything ever come of the C++11 addon-server plans? Was there any sticking point? Regarding the second set: - (First let me note that we did ultimately resolve this by using one of the boost rng's adopted by the standard.) - Does anyone have any new opinions / evaluations of the C++11 compiler support available now? gcc 4.9 seems quite good, I have been using it for a while. It seems it's not often available in "stable distributions" of linuxes but it's still not too hard to get your hands on, and it appears to implement almost everything. my clang copy has some minor bug that prevents me from compiling some things, but I didn't try to fix it yet, probably it's easy. I understand msvc is still lagging behind -- is that something we consider a sticking point? How would people feel about moving only to "msvc C++11". - Regarding "The keyword is »idiomatic C++11«." It seems it would be potentially daunting to attempt to rewrite all of the 100k's of lines of the project in idiomatic C++11 all at once, but perhaps we could break this into stages and do it over an extended period. Alternatively, everyone could just start using lambda functions everywhere and rewrite old code only as an after thought. - Regarding "I think the important thing is, that once we have done this, other developers can look whether they like C++11 or think it looks too different from C++98/03." So actually, I guess most devs right now know vaguely about C++11 and may have formed some kind of opinion. Maybe it would be helpful to get something like a show of hands so we can see who is comfortable with C++11 already / willing to learn? (I count myself in the latter category). Finally: - The other day, we added an extra travis build which checks C++11 compilation for the whole project. Currently it is set not to be strict, because we cannot compile without warnings. However we only get two types of warnings, one from something in the header of lib png (I think this can and should be easily suppressed), and the other is warnings about auto_ptr being deprecated. Assuming we resolve that I believe everything would be compiling without warnings. Would anyone thing it's worth it to do this and then set the travis build to require strict compilation to pass in C++11 mode? Then at least we won't make negative progress on C++11 while we decide what to do. Best Regards, Chris Beck
_______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
