[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [patch #8613] Simplify _AX_CXX_COMPILE_STDCXX_11_testbody

From: Matan Nassau
Subject: Re: [patch #8613] Simplify _AX_CXX_COMPILE_STDCXX_11_testbody
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2015 22:00:27 +0000

But here we are talking about a standard's version, not an implementation's version. A standard's version equals precisely what you should expect from an implementation...
On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 16:57 Peter Johansson <address@hidden> wrote:

On 02/28/2015 03:25 AM, anonymous wrote:
> IIUC the _AX_CXX_COMPILE_STDCXX_11_testbody macro from
> m4/am_cxx_compile_stdcxx_11.m4 tests for C++11 conformance via a number of
> C++11 tricks. I think it would be simpler to just test the __cplusplus macro
> against its C++11 value.
> static_assert(__cplusplus >= 201103L, "C++11?");
> I reckon GCC had an issue with this macro for a very long time, but IIUC it's
> now resolved, and we can rely on it at least for values greater or equal to
> that of C++11.
> I also think this change would make it easier to support checking for newer
> standards, like checking for the compliance of C++14. Its value for
> __cplusplus is 201402L, so it would be as simple as changing the static assert
> for that.

It's up to the maintainer what he wanna do with the macro, but I just
wanna mention that it's the Autoconf philosophy to rather check features
than version number etc. The latter are proxies of the former, but
unfortunaley they can often be quite inaccurate proxies.


Peter Johansson

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]