From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2272 invoked by alias); 15 Sep 2014 09:17:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 2246 invoked by uid 89); 15 Sep 2014 09:17:27 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: aserp1040.oracle.com Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com (HELO aserp1040.oracle.com) (141.146.126.69) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:17:26 +0000 Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id s8F9HNDr032309 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:17:23 GMT Received: from aserz7021.oracle.com (aserz7021.oracle.com [141.146.126.230]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.5+Sun/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s8F9HLcI027934 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:17:22 GMT Received: from abhmp0017.oracle.com (abhmp0017.oracle.com [141.146.116.23]) by aserz7021.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s8F9HLWr009463; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:17:21 GMT Received: from [192.168.1.4] (/79.33.94.210) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 02:17:21 -0700 Message-ID: <5416AE9E.6040400@oracle.com> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:17:00 -0000 From: Paolo Carlini User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jonathan Wakely CC: Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd@verizon.net>, "libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org" , gcc-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH. libstdc++] Use the correct C++14 __cplusplus value (201402L). Added C++1z to the preprocessor. References: <53F91799.2070902@verizon.net> <53FC4524.9090606@oracle.com> <20140826085206.GB2842@redhat.com> <53FC4B4E.1040802@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <53FC4B4E.1040802@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-09/txt/msg01165.txt.bz2 Hi again, On 08/26/2014 10:54 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Hi, > > On 08/26/2014 10:52 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> That seems like a good idea, but I'm not convinced there's any benefit >> in Ed's changes to do: >> >> -#if __cplusplus > 201103L >> +#if __cplusplus >= 201402L >> >> It seems like unnecessary churn to me, > about this, I had the same thought ;) By the way, in case isn't already clear, it occurs to me that the kind of change proposed by Ed, thus standardize on __cplusplus >= "required version", will make more sense when the C++17 Standard will be closer. So far, since we can simply do everything with only 201103L, my idea too of adding _GLIBCXX_CXX11 & co seems quite pointless. Paolo.