Re: A case for C++11 in Octave

[Michael Goffioul]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Mike Miller <address@hidden> wrote:

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 14:53:39 +0000, Carnë Draug wrote:
> But if we agree that people locked on oldstable versions (or veryoldstable
> in the case of RHEL and CentOS 5) are capable people, and that gcc 4.7
> is the best that they can build there, can we go with features available
> at least on that version?

It's a tradeoff, we just have to decide if the benefit to
maintenance/convenience of development is worth the cost of possibly
alienating some class of current or potential users and contributors.

I don't think it is, but I'm also not very fluent in or excited about
the C++11 language additions, so I have a bias. I'm willing to accept
that others who are more familiar with the language may see great
benefits and come to a consensus that it is highly worth it.

It's my understanding there are also some who want to build or develop
with Octave using other compilers not mentioned here so far, such as
MSVC or Intel. Does anyone know if this will no longer be possible?

As far as I know, MSVC has always put the emphasis on C++ rather than C (hence to miserable lack of some C99 features). But obviously, it depends on the specific wanted feature. The compliance list is available here:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh567368.aspx

Michael.