On 12/30/2014 07:50 AM, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On 29-12-2014 16:34, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
The note about C++14 conformance is great as it stands modulo link
errors.
Why is it great to not mention the experimental qualifier?
Do all files / libraries have to be compiled with the same -std option?
If so, this option causes ABI issues by itself.
Olaf
I should have replaced 'conformance' with 'feature completeness' in my
sentences.
The words in the message indicate 'features'. The word experimental
appears in bold.
My understanding is that the C++11 ABI changes to string, list,
ios_base::failure (are there others?) that have been queued for a while
have been put into gcc5. This is the big release. There was a message
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-12/msg01669.html (and
subsequent) on this.
Check https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg00268.html for
std::list.
Check https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg01750.html for
std::ios_base::failure.
I'm quite sure that once the ABI issues have been stabilized appropriate
formal announcements and documentation will appear on this subject.
Ed
