[Bf-committers] Towards C++11

[Martijn Berger]

@Campbell I am pretty sure give how hard Apple is pushing out new releases
and given how many people upgrade that we can just assume an llvm/clang
3.0+  feature set for c++11.

I think we should also do this analysis for C99 support and C11 support.
There are some other projects out there that use C++11 features (clang is
one) and they have made comprehensive analysis of what features they can
and do use.

There are some things we can use anyway like noexcept provided we use it
like the QT people use it so the code does not require a c++11 compiler but
you do get some benefit from compiling with one (
http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5/qtglobal.html#Q_DECL_NOEXCEPT)

I think getting a sort of caniuse.com  for c/c++ language features on the
wiki would be good way forward.






On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> General +1 to take advantage of C++11 where appropriate,
> AFAICS OSX needs some investigation?, otherwise we're close to being
> able to support it.
>
>
> @Tom M: I'm not concerned with static checking tools, mainly because
> using C++11 in a few places won't suddenly make static checkers fail
> on the rest of our code, eventually they will get updated too.
>
> Coverity has support:
> https://communities.coverity.com/docs/DOC-1571
> clang-static-analyser didn't work well for me last I checked with C++,
> but it might have improved in last year or so.
>
>
> @Ichthyo: Not being able to build Blender on older Linux isnt such a
> big deal since Blender can still run on them, if its important they
> can get a new compiler (I did this on a CentOS server, compiling a
> newer GCC/Clang isnt that big of a deal).
>
>
> @Jeffrey H: C++11 doesn't raise hardware requirements.
>
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Jeffrey H <italic.rendezvous at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > What about older hardware? I don't know much about C++11, but I would
> > imagine it takes advantage of newer processor instruction sets and I know
> > new compilers do the same. Would Blender still run on, say, an old
> Pentium
> > 4? The reason I ask is simply because a large number of users use Blender
> > because it's able to run on the proverbial toaster, where Maya and other
> > programs cannot. Is this actually an issue or am I just making stuff up?
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Ichthyostega <prg at ichthyostega.de>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Am 06.06.2014 17:54, schrieb Sergey Sharybin:
> >> > Why it might be useful?
> >>
> >> > C++11 brings some neat syntax and STD library extensions.
> >>
> >> ..plus the benefit you can get from using functors / closures wisely.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Downside is that we have to cut off some platforms / compilers.
> >>
> >> Basically we need GCC >= 4.7 and Clang >= 3.0
> >>
> >> And anything below that will not be supported anymore.
> >> Like RedHat Enterprise Linux. :-P
> >>
> >>
> >> Sounds like something for Blender 2.8.x
> >>
> >>         --Ichthyo
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bf-committers mailing list
> >> Bf-committers at blender.org
> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeffrey "Italic_" Hoover
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-committers mailing list
> > Bf-committers at blender.org
> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>
>
>
> --
> - Campbell
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>