[petsc-dev] C++11, compatibility versus simplicity

[Jed Brown]

Tim Tautges <tautges at mcs.anl.gov> writes:

> Switching your default C++ compilation type in response to one (of
> very many) of your dependent libs changing theirs seems odd, even for
> an otherwise-great one.  C++11 has some great stuff, but just how
> critical is it?

Did you read my first message?  The ABIs are often incompatible so we
can't reliably choose different dialects for different packages.  As
long as the public headers are safe with C++11, those packages can all
be used together.  If they are not, then it's the responsibility of
those maintainers to upgrade.  Most projects should require little or no
changes to work with both C++11 and older dialects.

Alternatively, you can tell Jack that he shouldn't have upgraded so soon
and then watch while he mixes himself a fancy cocktail, suggests that
you upgrade your headers, and sits down to add non-symmetric pivoting to
Clique. ;-)


I.e., everyone _can_ make their headers C++11-compatible and doing it
all now is less pain than doing it slowly, especially if it can put more
pressure on vendors to implement and on facilities to upgrade their
toolchains.  AFAIK, none of the major vendors have categorically
declared that they will not implement this standard.  (Yes, Microsoft,
I'm looking at your C99 abandonment.)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20131003/285aabf7/attachment.sig>