On 3/26/2017 7:22 AM, Marton Balint wrote: > > On Sat, 25 Mar 2017, James Almer wrote: > >> On 3/25/2017 8:51 PM, Marton Balint wrote: >>> Needed for the C+11 atomics. Also change add_cxxflags to check_cxxflags. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marton Balint <c...@passwd.hu> >>> --- >>> configure | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/configure b/configure >>> index c1aeb6e..6823894 100755 >>> --- a/configure >>> +++ b/configure >>> @@ -4648,7 +4648,7 @@ fi >>> >>> add_cppflags -D_ISOC99_SOURCE >>> add_cxxflags -D__STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS >>> -add_cxxflags -std=c++98 >>> +check_cxxflags -std=c++11 || check_cxxflags -std=c++0x >> >> Do compilers that support setting --std=c++0x (Old provisional name for >> C++11) >> have actual support for std::atomic? They have by definition experimental and >> incomplete support for the standard in question. > > Yes, gcc supports it since 4.4. > https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-status.html > > Also MSVC 2012 (which AFAIK does not even support -std) has support for it: > https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh874894(v=vs.110).aspx > > Clang since 3.1: > https://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html
Ok, cool then. > >> Maybe an actual check for it would be needed if --std=c++11 isn't available. > > Well, only decklink_enc needs this, so if we really want to check this, and > fail, if not, then it should be done somewhere after checking for decklink > stuff. I don't particularly think that is very useful, but can do it if you > think so. No, it's ok. Patch LGTM as is. Thanks for handling this. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
