4 ms·

> The downside, of course, is just how much code exists that is written in pre-C++11 dialects, and how many programmers are trained to write that sort of code.

> The downside, of course, is just how much code exists that is written in pre-C++11 dialects, and how many programmers are trained to write that sort of code. I do the same thing. Not because I can't write C++11, but because I still encounter systems with older compilers that I want to run programs on. What, is this surprising? Let's face reality: it's a little unreasonable to expect every system you work on to have a compiler less than 3 years old. Especially true on older Linux systems, it's sometimes a massive pain or even pretty much impossible to upgrade the existing compiler in a package-manager-friendly way (try upgrading Ubuntu 12.04's compiler to GCC 4.9, for example), so you'd have to compiler the compiler from scratch. Which is a pretty massive PITA and more or less requires a PhD of its own for GCC (Clang is a little better). And on Windows VC++ isn't always exactly following the correct standard. It's not necessarily outright impossible, but it's pretty impractical.

jevinskie 12y ago
When LLVM started to require C++11 (which we use as a library), my team decided to statically link libstdc++ into our product on Linux. Now we just depend on glibc (and we use symbol versioning to keep the required version to a minimum). It sounds like you ship source though, so it may not be an option for you.
Guvante 12y ago
> Let's face reality: it's a little unreasonable to expect every system you work on to have a compiler less than 3 years old. If you are running Linux, this is one thing that Windows gets right. (Although as you say VC++ has some catching up to do still).
- adrusi 12y ago
  Linux is on all parts of the spectrum here. Ubuntu LTS and Slackware are going to remain outdated by design. Arch Linux almost always have the most recent stable releases of GCC and clang, and you can even build development snapshots from AUR
  - shmerl 12y ago
    You don't need to use the compiler from the distro to release for that distro. There is such thing as cross compilation after all. Most do it out of habit and because distros don't offer such services out of the box. But if you build the cross compiler, you can use the newest one even if the distro ships the older. For example I had a building machine running RHEL 5 which was building for both RHEL 5 and RHEL 6 while using gcc 4.8.2 for both (cross compilers).
    - wfunction 12y ago
      You say "if you build the cross-compiler" as though it's as simple as "if you cross the street". Have you ever tried building GCC? I've wasted days on it and in the end still failed to make it work.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - shmerl 12y ago
        It is hard if you do it all manually. There are helpful tools like Crosstool-NG for example which make it easier. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_compilers#External_links https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_compilers#External_links
      - exDM69 12y ago
        > Have you ever tried building GCC? I've wasted days on it and in the end still failed to make it work. I've hand-built GCC for half a dozen of different target architectures over the years and it's perhaps one of the most stable pieces of software when it comes to building it. I've only had one build failure over the years and that was unstable from git (even that usually works no problem). To build GCC, follow the simple steps on the GCC manual. With a modern fast computer, it's all done in an hour or two (of mostly waiting).
        wfunction 12y ago
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  Heh! I am stuck on VC++ 2010 at work. I gaze longingly at C++11 features but can't use them. A pity, as the same codebase is also built under XCode and Clang.
sitkack 12y ago
> upgrade the existing compiler in a package-manager-friendly way This is your problem. Build a new compiler using the old compiler and install the entire new toolchain in /opt/my-gcc-4.9-0xfoof . rsync this new compiler to any machine you want. The package managers (people and code) a here for our suffering.

jevinskie 12y ago

When LLVM started to require C++11 (which we use as a library), my team decided to statically link libstdc++ into our product on Linux. Now we just depend on glibc (and we use symbol versioning to keep the required version to a minimum). It sounds like you ship source though, so it may not be an option for you.

Guvante 12y ago

> Let's face reality: it's a little unreasonable to expect every system you work on to have a compiler less than 3 years old. If you are running Linux, this is one thing that Windows gets right. (Although as you say VC++ has some catching up to do still).

adrusi 12y ago
Linux is on all parts of the spectrum here. Ubuntu LTS and Slackware are going to remain outdated by design. Arch Linux almost always have the most recent stable releases of GCC and clang, and you can even build development snapshots from AUR
- shmerl 12y ago
  You don't need to use the compiler from the distro to release for that distro. There is such thing as cross compilation after all. Most do it out of habit and because distros don't offer such services out of the box. But if you build the cross compiler, you can use the newest one even if the distro ships the older. For example I had a building machine running RHEL 5 which was building for both RHEL 5 and RHEL 6 while using gcc 4.8.2 for both (cross compilers).
  - wfunction 12y ago
    You say "if you build the cross-compiler" as though it's as simple as "if you cross the street". Have you ever tried building GCC? I've wasted days on it and in the end still failed to make it work.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - shmerl 12y ago
      It is hard if you do it all manually. There are helpful tools like Crosstool-NG for example which make it easier. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_compilers#External_links https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_compilers#External_links
    - exDM69 12y ago
      > Have you ever tried building GCC? I've wasted days on it and in the end still failed to make it work. I've hand-built GCC for half a dozen of different target architectures over the years and it's perhaps one of the most stable pieces of software when it comes to building it. I've only had one build failure over the years and that was unstable from git (even that usually works no problem). To build GCC, follow the simple steps on the GCC manual. With a modern fast computer, it's all done in an hour or two (of mostly waiting).
      - wfunction 12y ago
72deluxe 12y ago
Heh! I am stuck on VC++ 2010 at work. I gaze longingly at C++11 features but can't use them. A pity, as the same codebase is also built under XCode and Clang.

sitkack 12y ago

> upgrade the existing compiler in a package-manager-friendly way This is your problem. Build a new compiler using the old compiler and install the entire new toolchain in /opt/my-gcc-4.9-0xfoof . rsync this new compiler to any machine you want. The package managers (people and code) a here for our suffering.