X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From: Rugxulo <rugxulo AT gmail 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 06:45:37 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <c6438915-77be-429d-b2a7-a4cacdb9f967@g7g2000vbd.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>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.13.115.246
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1322405250 4900 127.0.0.1 (27 Nov 2011 14:47:30 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 14:47:30 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
Injection-Info: g7g2000vbd.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.13.115.246; posting-account=p5rsXQoAAAB8KPnVlgg9E_vlm2dvVhfO
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HNKUARELSC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/535.2
 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/15.0.874.121 Safari/535.2,gzip(gfe)
Bytes: 2325
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id pARF02XV010342
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

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