delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f |
From: | jimm <jmichae3 AT yahoo DOT com> |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | Re: internal compiler error with c++11 features on 4.6.2 |
Date: | Sun, 27 Nov 2011 16:00:20 -0800 (PST) |
Organization: | http://groups.google.com |
Lines: | 34 |
Message-ID: | <500942d9-99ce-4845-9c96-237bf349c27e@g1g2000pri.googlegroups.com> |
References: | <64237354-a1d5-4c03-b446-b7de61297344 AT a2g2000prb DOT googlegroups DOT com> |
<bc5e54a1-40b5-4737-a497-e6b74454968d AT l23g2000pro DOT googlegroups DOT com> <c6438915-77be-429d-b2a7-a4cacdb9f967 AT g7g2000vbd DOT googlegroups DOT com> | |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | 24.22.56.37 |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
X-Trace: | posting.google.com 1322438421 22969 127.0.0.1 (28 Nov 2011 00:00:21 GMT) |
X-Complaints-To: | groups-abuse AT google DOT com |
NNTP-Posting-Date: | Mon, 28 Nov 2011 00:00:21 +0000 (UTC) |
Complaints-To: | groups-abuse AT google DOT com |
Injection-Info: | g1g2000pri.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.22.56.37; posting-account=05hOMwoAAAB6R8xtiQKzEljSMzgOhVF1 |
User-Agent: | G2/1.0 |
X-Google-Web-Client: | true |
X-Google-Header-Order: | HUALESNKRC |
X-HTTP-UserAgent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/8.0,gzip(gfe) |
Bytes: | 2893 |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
X-MIME-Autoconverted: | from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id pAS0F17f017369 |
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
On Nov 27, 6:45 am, Rugxulo <rugx DOT DOT DOT AT gmail DOT com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Nov 26, 11:53 pm, jimm <jmich DOT DOT DOT AT yahoo DOT com> wrote: > > > > > does 4.6.2 not support initializer lists and other c++0x stuff yet? I > > need it desperately. my code base already requires this in several > > programs, and the DOS platform is lagging behind. > > You have every right to be curious about C++11, but I don't see why > you would put all your eggs in that basket, esp. considering how VERY > new it is and incompletely implemented. I don't think any compiler > comes close to conformance yet. So how desperate can you be? Aren't > you the one writing the code? Somehow I just doubt C++98 was so > woefully incomplete all these years as people still got work done. But > (sigh), I guess progress always marches on. > > I'm just saying, "lagging behind" is a bit of a stretch, even for DOS. > C++11 is just too new. Don't rely on it. Eventually things will get > there in the rest of the world. But for now, it's too fresh. > > http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C++0xCompilerSupport I can't wait until they put boost in there with TR2. I have been waiting for decimal128 math and <string> compare that is case insensitive - what were the designers thinking? ... :-) many needed improvements... initializer lists should have been done a long time ago. I also think 128-bit integers should be available now, since we have GUIDs and UUIDs. and GPT. also, you can't represent SI and IEC units sufficiently without them.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |