4 ms·
A comparison of C++11 language support in VS2012, g++ 4.7 and Clang 3.1
- mparlane 14y agoThis is desperately missing color coded cells :( So is the linked wiki at apache.org.
- danieldk 14y agoA detailed list that is regularly updated, with exact version numbers has been around for years on the stdcxx Wiki: http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C++0xCompilerSupport http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C++0xCompilerSupport
- thwest 14y agoWhich also has nice links to the specs for each feature.
- snogglethorpe 14y agoIndeed, I suspect it's a reasonable bet that the guy (Korban) just used the apache.org page and reformatted the contents with his target audience and personal goals (which seems to be selling his book) in mind. [Which is not a bad thing, mind you—the apache page is fairly accurate and up-to-date (at least for the major compilers), so it's better people use that as a reference than doing it themselves badly. It would have been nice if he'd included a link though ...]
- nikic 14y agoThis is missing the supports list for the Intel Compiler (which to my knowledge has a pretty good C++11 coverage).
- TwoBit 14y agoIsn't Intel using a modified EDG front-end? Or has Intel completely customized EDG to the point that they are maintaining their own branch?
- cpeterso 14y agoGNU tracks C++11 support in recent gcc versions here: http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html
- TwoBit 14y agoThat site should clarify that they are talking about the open source Clang 3.1 and not Apple Clang 3.1. Apple is unfortunately using the same version numbering as the open source clang yet their compiler is significantly less featured. It's ironic that Apple started clang, yet their clang is the most out of date.
- nuje 14y agoThere are still a few features that C++ lacks. If it only added a s-expression syntax and macros, and built-in logic programming support, it would be perfect!