Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On 08/24/2014 12:37 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
>> With revision 214400 we have the C++14 value of __cplusplus set to the
>> correct value of 201402L (from 201300L).
> It occurs to me: instead of having to remember every time those numbers,
> couldn't we predefine, for example:
>
> __cplusplus_98
> __cplusplus_11
> __cplusplus_14
>
> with the correct values of course?!?
But won't this lead to portability trouble in the future when people see
those macros and start using them in their own code, breaking
compilation with older or non-g++ compilers?
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
