Jan Kundrát <[email protected]> wrote: > On Friday, 20 December 2013 10:00:43 CEST, Martin Vaeth wrote: >> The example with string reference-counters which you gave is IMHO >> typical; > > You have not considered the implications of the updated requirements
It seems you are changing the topic: We were talking about downward-compatibility of source code. There is no doubt that the C++11 requirements need a new ABI: > without breaking the ABI [...] > but I do not expect that the end result will allow linking a translation > unit built for C++98 by GCC <= 4.8 with one built for C++11 by the new > compiler. That's why it might be a good idea to translate with C++11 by default. No old units <-> no problem ;) Again: It is clear that this route is possible only if the number of packages breaking with such a default is small, and fixes are simple. Which needs to be examined by "experiment" and not by theoretical considerations.
