From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-170979-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 27384 invoked by alias); 30 Oct 2011 14:00:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 27373 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Oct 2011 14:00:23 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mailout05.t-online.de (HELO mailout05.t-online.de) (194.25.134.82)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:00:03 +0000
Received: from fwd10.aul.t-online.de (fwd10.aul.t-online.de )	by mailout05.t-online.de with smtp 	id 1RKVva-00034W-6X; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:59:58 +0100
Received: from [192.168.0.104] (JT3PNBZYohZYnLL0UuvSjfwFBO2k3IOwkO8gyYpKsIDUTqjP39r44jKSJdpwp2yw8b@[93.218.152.87]) by fwd10.t-online.de	with esmtp id 1RKVvY-0STNz60; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:59:56 +0100
Subject: Re: C++11 no longer experimental
From: Oleg Endo <oleg.endo@t-online.de>
To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>
Cc: Joe Buck <Joe.Buck@synopsys.COM>, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>,  Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>, Nathan Ridge <zeratul976@hotmail.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1110301411500.3250@gerinyyl.fvgr>
References: <BLU162-W198148B0149AEE08F2A31D960D0@phx.gbl>	 <CAH6eHdRyQvh2eibPy+W8DELJu0_8ndqJbJYZ9Zd1KVGs=vpe2A@mail.gmail.com>	 <CAH6eHdQ2eXmCZ5P7t189OiWiFCzWbtRRM3DtCc9RrpnuNBZ-Yw@mail.gmail.com>	 <20110921182543.GA31859@synopsys.com>	 <alpine.LNX.2.00.1110301411500.3250@gerinyyl.fvgr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 18:27:00 -0000
Message-ID: <1319983195.1806.4.camel@yam-132-YW-E178-FTW>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00537.txt.bz2

On Sun, 2011-10-30 at 14:14 +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:

> +  <p>C++0x was the working name of a new ISO C++ standard, which then
> +  was released in 2011 as C++11 and introduces a host of new features
> +  into the standard C++ language and library. This project seeks to
>    implement new C++0x features in GCC and to make it one of the first
>    compilers to bring C++0x to C++ programmers.</p>

Since C++11 is now the official name, wouldn't it be better to use the
new name instead of the old one after the initial historical
introduction? :)
Like... 

C++0x was the working name of a new ISO C++ standard, which was then
released in 2011 as C++11 and introduces a host of new features
into the standard C++ language and library. This project seeks to
implement new C++11 features in GCC and to make it one of the first
compilers to bring C++11 to C++ programmers.

Cheers,
Oleg