On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:47:05PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Thanks for doing that.
>
> I don't use C++, so I'm not the best person to review this patch.
> But from a quick look I can see one thing missing: the documentation
> needs updating.
Sure, I mentioned why it was missing in my mail. I'
On 01/21/2013 05:46 AM, Roger Leigh wrote:
> For both C and C++, I think there are some considerations
> here where it does make sense:
>
> - If my project supports language standard n, enabling
> standard n+1 or n+2 enables language features which are
> actively harmful to use, since unintent
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:02:01AM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 01/21/2013 05:46 AM, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > For both C and C++, I think there are some considerations
> > here where it does make sense:
> >
> > - If my project supports language standard n, enabling
> > standard n+1 or n+2 enable
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:47:05PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Thanks for doing that.
>
> I don't use C++, so I'm not the best person to review this patch.
> But from a quick look I can see one thing missing: the documentation
> needs updating.
I've attached an updated patch which includes all th
Roger Leigh writes:
> However, if you look at the C++11 features like declspec, automatic
> type inference, array initialisers, delegate constructors,
> range-based for loops, lambdas, etc. these features can not be
> substituted for. If you use them, you absolutely require a C++11
> compiler; th
On 01/21/2013 12:36 PM, Roger Leigh wrote:
> For C stuff like
> const/restrict/volatile/inline, it's possible to achieve this
> fairly simply, and autoconf does a very good job here.
>
> However, if you look at the C++11 features like declspec,
> automatic type inference, array initialisers, deleg
