This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
RE: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce gdb::unique_ptr
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pedro Alves [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 12:23 PM
> To: Metzger, Markus T <firstname.lastname@example.org>; gdb-
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce gdb::unique_ptr
> > Would it make sense to switch to C++11, instead?
> I think it would make a lot of sense to switch to C++11. I'd love
> that. rvalue references support, move-aware containers, "auto",
> std::unique_ptr and std::shared_ptr would be all very nice to have.
> The only question in my mind is -- are people OK with requiring
> gcc 4.8 or later?
> I think gcc 4.8 or newer were available in Fedora 20. I believe
> Ubuntu 12.04 had it available as an option. On older RHEL systems,
> it's available in DTS.
> On older systems, you'd need to compile a newer gcc or clang first
> before building gdb. Would people find that acceptable? Or put
> another way, would anyone find that unacceptable?
Wow, that was a long reply to such a small question. I was mainly
wondering if it makes sense to write (and maintain) ones own version
of a standard library feature.
The big step was not supporting C any longer. Requiring C++11 looks
small, by comparison.
BTW, I noticed that maintainers seem very busy these days and patches
are waiting unusually long for review.
Intel Deutschland GmbH
Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de
Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Christian Lamprechter
Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
Registered Office: Munich
Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928