Re: [patch #8613] Simplify _AX_CXX_COMPILE_STDCXX_11_testbody

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 <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> 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.
>
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> --
> Peter Johansson
>
>