From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5806 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2014 10:43:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 5784 invoked by uid 89); 24 Jan 2014 10:43:04 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-vb0-f43.google.com Received: from mail-vb0-f43.google.com (HELO mail-vb0-f43.google.com) (209.85.212.43) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 10:43:03 +0000 Received: by mail-vb0-f43.google.com with SMTP id p5so1742526vbn.2 for ; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 02:43:00 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=y0zyXIQGH2drGwAV8GjJj3ejWw2v2wPZXsAcGvwYmho=; b=mWo93bMqDgw+hensjBxxtLUISLFarf5PG+B5Xk9CcPvdCAngSrk01PQiE+chOJVSZq Rolfh1oscaFG8LTUCyuzhZ3FdYlS/1xRpzLRRAGAAPEvu5oNCKBoRbAAqTMtTlrvf1LQ pE3J3Dxl6+XhndMq9ZvbKUf7EGF6Y4imZgvD/eAFGkGBbSNvIz8VEbukEM6A8JVW65C2 ctaLHtBmtsCqB2wPiEwOWHJgbEgnfN11m2THF1BtuEdWWz5O/Sq6gbBnnQWN/06lJIEH 7A46Ny5KXynvGB23NK4x/n2VHemS7G3CHViP5rXEHMaqalRxX9VpYOg/Uq70WP7eg9ur VZCw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlyi1x/+UJiakjJJtos/JmA/a6VvrfLwv28M8PI0nK+jhsTsWZyrhCYjbNZtnBQXl87ffHA MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.174.200 with SMTP id u8mr7258409vcz.6.1390560180782; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 02:43:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.2.6 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 02:43:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 10:43:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Is C++11 to be default for GCC 4.9? From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Hagstr=F6m?= To: pinskia@gmail.com Cc: "gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SW-Source: 2014-01/txt/msg00089.txt.bz2 Thanks for the quick answer, and sorry for posting to the wrong list. In my defense I did google quite a lot and found some people thinking that GCC might switch, and some that it might not. And mainly I was just hopeful, since I was hoping that the ABI compatibility issues with boost in linux package repositories would resolve itself within a few years... One reference from the Debian mailing lists: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/08/msg00117.html Anyway, thanks again. And now I'll have to go and reconsider my alternatives of if I can get to use C++11... /Lars On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 10:36 AM, wrote: > > >> On Jan 24, 2014, at 1:26 AM, Marc Glisse wrote: >> >> Wrong list, please send any follow-ups to gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org only. >> >>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2014, Lars Hagstr=F6m wrote: >>> >>> I'm wondering whether GCC 4.9 will switch to -std=3Dgnu++11 as default? >> >> No. This is asked regularly, google should find the answer easily. > > Considering GCC has not switched to c99 by default what makes someone thi= nk GCC should switch to c++11 by default? > > -- Andrew > >> >>> I got an error that implies that "auto" is not usable, which would >>> mean that C++11 is not enabled, but I also got a warning that implied >>> that gnu++11 is "enabled by default". >>> >>>> error: =91xdir=92 does not name a type >>> >>>> warning: non-static data member initializers only available with -std= =3Dc++11 or -std=3Dgnu++11 [enabled by default] >>> >>> Or does the "enabled by default" bit mean something other than I think = it means? >> >> It is the warning that is enabled by default (in other messages you woul= d see [-Wunused] or [-Wformat] etc to tell you which option controls this w= arning). >> >> -- >> Marc Glisse