C++11 in KDevelop 4.6

[Aleix Pol]

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Milian Wolff <mail at milianw.de> wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> is anyone opposed to open KDevelop 4.6 for C++11? I.e. that means we
> continue
> to work as-is and provide a kick-ass KDevelop 4.5. Once we branch 4.5, we
> enable C++11 mode globally and start using it in master.
>
> ######## Reasons:
>
> - KDevelop is a free time project and it should be fun to work on it.
> C++11 is
> quite a lot of fun, if not only because it's new. This is actually the main
> reason for me to go down the C++11 route. This would also allow us to learn
> C+11 which is a benefit for those of us who do professional work-work
> programming.
>
> - Tons of potential performance benefits thanks to constexpr, noexcept, r-
> value references etc. pp.
>
> - Much easier to read code thanks to auto, lambdas, alias templates,
> defaulted
> functions, etc. pp. This also leads to better maintainability.
>
> - Improved compiler analysis thanks to e.g. static assert, override, final,
> nullptr, explicit conversion operators, deleted functions, etc. pp.
>
> ######## Compilers:
>
> See also: http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C%2B%2B0xCompilerSupport
>
> Personally I'd say we should just require these compiler versions and
> above:
>
> clang 3.1 - required for constexpr, lambda, initializer lists, ...
>
> GCC 4.7 - 4.6 might even be enough, but 4.7 has some more stuff like
> delegating constructors, override, final and non-static data member
> initialization.
>
> msvc ctp november 2012
> (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2012/11/02/visual-c-c-11-and-the-
> future-of-c.aspx)
>
> ######## Potential Issues:
>
> - FreeBSD situation? http://wiki.freebsd.org/NewC%2B%2BStack <-- I'm not
> sure
> how far they are. But quite frankly, I'd say they can stick to KDevelop 4.5
> until they have a modern compiler like clang 3.1.
>
> - Debian? Wheezy should come with GCC 4.7 if I'm not mistaken:
> http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/gcc Imo it's fine if we only support
> that
> version of Debian. All other distros probably already have GCC 4.7
> available,
> or will have it in their next distro release in time for KDevelop 4.6
>
> - Windows? If anything breaks on MSVC it's imo not an issue as KDevelop is
> defacto dead on Windows (noone is working on it there). Also considering
> that
> the windows team is actually working on proper C++11 support (see link
> above)
> its only a matter of time until it has everything we need.
>
> - Backporting: Now this is imo a potential issue, but considering that we
> don't do such a good job in that regard anyways, it's not that big a
> deal...
> And most of the fixes we do backport are oneliners which could be done in
> the
> 4.5 branches and forward ported to 4.6.
>
> ######## Comments? Feedback?
>
> Cheers
> --
> Milian Wolff
> mail at milianw.de
> http://milianw.de
> --
> KDevelop-devel mailing list
> KDevelop-devel at kdevelop.org
> https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinfo/kdevelop-devel
>
>
Hi!
Well honestly, on one hand I get what you mean when you say you want it for
fun.

>From my point of view, I'd wait until we switch to KDevelop5/Qt5 where
C++11 usage is more useful and where all the dependencies will be bumped
all-together.

On the other hand, if everybody really wants to or if we had a specific
case where we'd take a really important leap forward I wouldn't strongly
oppose to bump our requirement. Or putting it in a different way, if
bumping our compiler dependency makes us to leave some people behind, let's
not do it just for the fun of it.

Aleix
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20121122/52f29b4a/attachment.html>