Re: C++11
Stephen Leake <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.version-control.monotone.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Markus Wanner <[email protected]> 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