On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 13:41 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, skaller wrote: > > | > | On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 12:40 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > | > | > | I think this is the wrong idea. Deprecated does carry a lot > | > | of weight. It allows a new compiler without a legacy > | > | to elide the feature and specify it is ISO compliant > | > | 'minus' the deprecated features, which is quite different > | > | from 'non-compliant'. > | > > | > Do you know of any of those compilers with user base we can talk to? > | > | In approximation of the feature, yes: gcc! > > I asking for an *existing* compiler, not a hypothetical one we have > not released yet -- therefore we don't know what is in it.
Yes, gcc at it is right now has switches which control 'something like' what we're talking about. True, not exactly a list of deprecated features, I don't know of a compiler that does exactly that, sorry. I guess you really want to know exactly that since you might actually implement it if there were a positive response from users of some other compiler. I would actually like "strict ISO conformance without any deprecated features generates a hard error EXCEPT for X Y and Z" so I could determine easily exactly where my code doesn't conform ( by adding X, Y, and Z until the compiler stopped rejecting the program). -- John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net> Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net
