On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Mike Hommey <m...@glandium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:02:46PM -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Mike Hommey <m...@glandium.org> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 06:34:19PM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > > > On 2014-10-01, 6:26 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: > > > > >On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 11:00:28AM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > > > >>On 2014-10-01, 9:01 AM, Joshua Cranmer 🐧 wrote: > > > > >>>On 10/1/2014 4:23 AM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > > > > >>>>On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 1:08 AM, Cameron McCormack <c...@mcc.id.au > > > > > wrote: > > > > >>>>>On 01/10/14 17:57, Kan-Ru Chen (陳侃如) wrote: > > > > >>>>>>It seems all the compilers we use support the c++11 ">>" in > > > template, > > > > >>>>>>could we start using it in new code? > > > > >>>>>Yes we have some uses of that already. It's also mentioned in > > > > >>>>> > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Using_CXX_in_Mozilla_code. > > > > >>>>Note the large, red warning at the top of that page "This page > is a > > > > >>>>draft for expository and exploratory purposes. Do not trust the > > > > >>>>information listed here." > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>I don't know why that page exists with such an > authoritative-looking > > > URL. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>The warning was in part because I never got confirmation on our > > > minimum > > > > >>>supported versions, particularly minimum clang version, and in > part > > > > >>>because the C++11 library portion was never well organized. > > > > >> > > > > >>I think the C++ language features section is quite accurate, and > > > should be > > > > >>relied on by everyone. > > > > > > > > > >I don't think we have consensus on a broad use of "auto". > > > > > > > > Sure. Like any other C++ feature, just because our compilers > support it > > > > doesn't mean it's always a good idea. That page, however, is > supposed to > > > > explain what C++ features can be used in our code from a compiler > support > > > > point of view. > > > > > > > With the current content of the page, it's really not clear that one > > > shouldn't use auto everywhere. > > > > > > How so? The page says that it "The list of acceptable features > > is given below" and the column is called "Can be used in code". > > That seems like permission, not encouragement, let alone > > requirement. > > And no restriction. Why would there be a restriction? The relevant questions for use of this kind of feature should be: 1. Does it break our toolchain? 2. Does it have some other serious negative consequence (like messes up total system performance). As long as the answers to these questions are "no", then the default assumption should be that people will exercise good judgement, not that things are forbidden unless there's consensus that they are good features. Obviously, if you have some argument that auto is bad programming practice or a hazard and should thus be forbidden, that's something you could make and see if people generally agree... -Ekr _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
