From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 79291 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2019 15:43:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 79277 invoked by uid 89); 1 Nov 2019 15:43:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-10.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 spammy=H*MI:sk:e123d9f, H*f:sk:e123d9f, H*i:sk:e123d9f X-HELO: us-smtp-1.mimecast.com Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (HELO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) (205.139.110.120) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 15:43:21 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1572622999; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=E9ybi/86HonEEagT4rERKTT2dCZdMPB8jG0SvH7cyFU=; b=aoj/0STRb2K2bypEwST3Kg+rg5pJ/FHIFp0KtmT+6Bz3aSM5JVz3GsqdDLik5xEDwlz3de AUDcrl3u8+XkxmDfX16Hr8eDuv/VPM94FiWKl2cea/drn7FdjmI1a1sd4AxOF2N5636cf4 llFeSXogmjdclgNKLmrYKdUQ/zrW0Rg= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-16-2HxmE3t9PVeVleO7xG_Apg-1; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 11:43:16 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2ED19107ACC0; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:43:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.20.4.51]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B32695D9CA; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:43:14 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2019 15:43:00 -0000 From: Marek Polacek To: Jeff Law Cc: Romain Geissler , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, GCC Patches Subject: Re: GCC 10.0 Status Report (2019-10-22), Stage 1 to end Nov 16th Message-ID: <20191101154312.GP21634@redhat.com> References: <20191101150835.GO21634@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-SW-Source: 2019-11/txt/msg00007.txt.bz2 On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 09:31:07AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 11/1/19 9:08 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 04:01:12PM +0100, Romain Geissler wrote: > >> Le mar. 22 oct. 2019 =C3=A0 14:53, Richard Biener = a =C3=A9crit : > >>> > >>> Please make sure to get features intended for GCC 10 finished > >>> and reviewed before the end of stage 1. > >>> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I understand my question comes very (most likely too) late, but are > >> there any plans to switch the default C++ dialect to -std=3Dgnu++17 wh= en > >> invoking g++ ? C++17 support in gcc is now quite complete, has been > >> out tested by some users since gcc 8, so shall it be switched on by > >> default in gcc 10 ? Or gcc 11 ? However I fear doing that may break > >> some tests in the testsuite, I hope not too many. > >=20 > > I plan to propose a switch to -std=3Dgnu++17 in GCC 11. I think it's w= ay > > too late for GCC 10. > >=20 > > Dealing with the testsuite fallout, and rebuilding Fedora packages is > > of course part of that switch. > FWIW, we *could* do the rebuild test, we've got time for that. What's > far more interesting would be dealing with the fallout ;-) I most definitely had your tester in mind ;). > I'd tend to agree though, flip the default as soon as gcc-11 stage1 > opens. That gives us plenty of time to deal with any fallout. Sounds like we have a plan. -- Marek Polacek =E2=80=A2 Red Hat, Inc. =E2=80=A2 300 A St, Boston, MA