Re: [Monotone-devel] C++11

[Markus Wanner]

On 05/16/2014 05:17 PM, Stephen Leake wrote:
> 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.

Oh, right, I read that the wrong way around. Thanks for clarifying.

Either way, the script now does what we want it to do. I should adjust
the comment, though.

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

Well, the intent of the script is to *test* what works and what not.
(And MSVC needs an entirely different build system.)

Regards

Markus Wanner

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature