Re: [Monotone-devel] C++11

[Stephen Leake]

Markus Wanner <address@hidden> writes:

> Interesting, I thought I tested that. But you're right, this looks like
> the macro doesn't do what it's supposed to do. It itself claims:
>
> #   The first argument, if specified, indicates whether you insist on an
> #   extended mode (e.g. -std=gnu++11) or a strict conformance mode (e.g.
> #   -std=c++11).  If neither is specified, you get whatever works, with
> #   preference for an extended mode.
>
> I left it unspecified, as I'm fine with whatever works (tm).
>
> I corrected the order of tests, now. So for gcc, it now yields the c++??
> rather than gnu++?? variants.

But it says "with preference for an extended mode.", which means it
should pick gnu++ if both work. Which is what it did.

If we are also supporting clang and MSVC, we need c++11, not gnu++11 (I think).

-- 
-- Stephe