Well... there are two different issues "start using C++ 11" and "require C++ 11". We can start using it now. The main question is when to make it a requirement. (I've written lots of production code that compiles both with and without C++ 11 features)

For the record my computer is currently stuck with gcc 4.2.1 since the hardware itself (32-bit CPU) is limited to OSX 10.6 and that does not have newer.

*However* there is another problem with not using the system compiler. Doing so requires blocking any potential users from contributing without building custom versions of the compilers themselves. That's perhaps not much of an issue for an advanced coder, but definitely limits a certain pool of potential contributors.

I'm not sure breaking out Mac for compiling is necessary, just that people who want to work on this need to use a more recent OS version. The default system compiler (clang) for 10.7+ supports -std=cxx11.

Using MacPorts, clang-3.3/clang-3.4/clang-3.5 currently build for 10.6 64-bit and install from prebuilt binaries. I don't have any information about 32 bit builds, per se, but would encourage Jon to try again as I believe the previous problems have been resolved.

Using MacPorts, clang-3.3/clang-3.4/clang-3.5 currently build for 10.6 64-bit and install from prebuilt binaries. I don't have any information about 32 bit builds, per se, but would encourage Jon to try again as I believe the previous problems have been resolved. If there are remaining problems a ticket would be appreciated.

On Fri, Jun 27, 2014, at 12:03 PM, Tavmjong Bah wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed a bunch of 'for' loops in Liam's code and that got me > wondering about using C++11 in the experimental branch as 'auto' is so > much nicer that "std::map<SPDocument*,int>::iterator iter". When can we > start using C++11? > > I noticed that http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/C%2B%2B11 only > shows results for one Window's compiler. Is there a test program we can > run? Fedora 20 is using GCC 4.8 and clang 3.4; both support 'auto' (GCC > since 4.4). > Well... there are two different issues "start using C++ 11" and "require C++ 11". We can start using it now. The main question is when to make it a requirement. (I've written lots of production code that compiles both with and without C++ 11 features)

The secondary question is *which* parts of C++ 11 we can require, and which we have to defer. I believe last time I checked things for the day job included versions of gcc had only about 40% C++ 11 coverage. We also will need to take care to differentiate between C++ 11 features that are present versus those that function correctly. :-) So we'll need to add a chart of which compilers we need to stay compatible with. Then we can cross-reference with the Apache page and quickly update our chart.

For the record my computer is currently stuck with gcc 4.2.1 since the hardware itself (32-bit CPU) is limited to OSX 10.6 and that does not have newer.

Some end-user research on this specific point would be good.

On Fri, Jun 27, 2014, at 03:48 PM, Johan Engelen wrote: >> The secondary question is *which* parts of C++ 11 we can require, and >> which we have to defer. I believe last time I checked things for the day >> job included versions of gcc had only about 40% C++ 11 coverage. We also >> will need to take care to differentiate between C++ 11 features that are >> present versus those that function correctly. :-) >> >> So we'll need to add a chart of which compilers we need to stay >> compatible with. Then we can cross-reference with the Apache page and >> quickly update our chart. > This is what this page is about: > http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/C%2B%2B11 OK. That can be a good start. However we are missing the other info... namely which version of which OS's are and are not supported, and which compilers they have. Ubuntu is pretty good for defining their support lifetimes, but slightly poor with which compilers & libs are in which versions. So we just need a little legwork to sync from that. I'd say the main question will be for the enterprise distros. CentOS/RHEL, Scientific and SUSE might cover the bases. RHEL 5.x is still in production for a few more years, so we might want to consider that. RHEL 6.x could replace it as a baseline target. Some end-user research on this specific point would be good. >> For the record my computer is currently stuck with gcc 4.2.1 since the >> hardware itself (32-bit CPU) is limited to OSX 10.6 and that does not >> have newer. > I hope you realize that this is not really tenable for Inkscape to keep > compatible with such old compilers... (7 years is not that old in human > terms, but it is a lot in computer terms) Yes. However we need to keep in mind that compatibility with older hardware is a key selling point for many in their decision to use open source software. I am open, however, to being declared to be on "ancient" hardware. As long as we make an informed explicit decision we should be good.

Hi, I noticed a bunch of 'for' loops in Liam's code and that got me wondering about using C++11 in the experimental branch as 'auto' is so much nicer that "std::map<SPDocument*,int>::iterator iter". When can we start using C++11? I noticed that http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/C%2B%2B11 only shows results for one Window's compiler. Is there a test program we can run? Fedora 20 is using GCC 4.8 and clang 3.4; both support 'auto' (GCC since 4.4).

Hi, I noticed a bunch of 'for' loops in Liam's code and that got me wondering about using C++11 in the experimental branch as 'auto' is so much nicer that "std::map<SPDocument*,int>::iterator iter". When can we start using C++11? I noticed that http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/C%2B%2B11 only shows results for one Window's compiler. Is there a test program we can run? Fedora 20 is using GCC 4.8 and clang 3.4; both support 'auto' (GCC since 4.4). Tav

I seem to remember starting a thread on building Inkscape with std=c++11 and the build fails since M_PI and friends would become undefined. So, the build will fail or at least fails for me with revision 13747 (Is that the same as 0.91 release branch?). I think one suggestion was to collect them all into one header file... On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Johan Engelen <jbc.engelen@...2592...> wrote: > Hi all, > Now that we have branched for release, can we now *finally* switch > trunk to require C++11? > Let's start with features supported by GCC 4.6 [1]. > > I am very rapidly loosing my patience here and find it very demotivating > that we are still hung-up on this. > > Googling a bit and reading on our mail thread finds plenty of options > for people on ancient hardware. > > -Johan > > [1] http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C%2B%2B0xCompilerSupport > > > On 27-6-2014 21:03, Tavmjong Bah wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I noticed a bunch of 'for' loops in Liam's code and that got me >> wondering about using C++11 in the experimental branch as 'auto' is so >> much nicer that "std::map<SPDocument*,int>::iterator iter". When can we >> start using C++11? >> >> I noticed that http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/C%2B%2B11 only >> shows results for one Window's compiler. Is there a test program we can >> run? Fedora 20 is using GCC 4.8 and clang 3.4; both support 'auto' (GCC >> since 4.4). >> >> Tav >> >> >> >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server > from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards > with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more > Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157005751&iu=/4140/ostg... > _______________________________________________ > Inkscape-devel mailing list > Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

Isn't that still a little nonstandard? Some g++11 would not be allowed with c++11? :) On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Johan Engelen <jbc.engelen@...2592...> wrote: > You should compile with -std=g++11 or -std=gnu++0x. > Per default, gcc includes a bunch on non-standard C++ things, so the default > is something like -std=g++03. Our code is non-standard compliant, but I have > not found the energy yet to fix that. > > Our 64bit Windows builds have been using -std=gnu++0x for a while now btw. > > -Johan > > > On 22-11-2014 14:32, Partha Bagchi wrote: >> I seem to remember starting a thread on building Inkscape with >> std=c++11 and the build fails since M_PI and friends would become >> undefined. So, the build will fail or at least fails for me with >> revision 13747 (Is that the same as 0.91 release branch?). >> >> I think one suggestion was to collect them all into one header file... >> >> On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Johan Engelen >> <jbc.engelen@...2592...> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> Now that we have branched for release, can we now *finally* switch >>> trunk to require C++11? >>> Let's start with features supported by GCC 4.6 [1]. >>> >>> I am very rapidly loosing my patience here and find it very demotivating >>> that we are still hung-up on this. >>> >>> Googling a bit and reading on our mail thread finds plenty of options >>> for people on ancient hardware. >>> >>> -Johan >>> >>> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C%2B%2B0xCompilerSupport >>> >>> >>> On 27-6-2014 21:03, Tavmjong Bah wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I noticed a bunch of 'for' loops in Liam's code and that got me >>>> wondering about using C++11 in the experimental branch as 'auto' is so >>>> much nicer that "std::map<SPDocument*,int>::iterator iter". When can we >>>> start using C++11? >>>> >>>> I noticed that http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/C%2B%2B11 only >>>> shows results for one Window's compiler. Is there a test program we can >>>> run? Fedora 20 is using GCC 4.8 and clang 3.4; both support 'auto' (GCC >>>> since 4.4). >>>> >>>> Tav >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server >>> from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards >>> with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more >>> Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE >>> >>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157005751&iu=/4140/ostg... >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Inkscape-devel mailing list >>> Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel >>

On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 4:37 AM, Johan Engelen <jbc.engelen@...2592...> wrote: > Hi all, > Now that we have branched for release, can we now *finally* switch > trunk to require C++11? I know this is exciting and useful stuff, but since we branched for release it would really be nice if people would focus on the remaining issues we have for 0.91. You talk about losing patience, and it would really be nice if you understood how quickly our users will lose patience with Inkscape if we keep breaking features and accumulating regression bugs on things that used to work. I'm not saying C++11 is a low priority. However, releasing a minimally broken new stable release (the first in over FOUR years) should probably be worthy of more attention than trunk for issues of this nature at this at this point (which is not a perspective I would have if things weren't in such bad shape).