Re: gtkmm and C++0x

[Daniel Elstner <daniel kitta googlemail com>]

Hi,

Am Dienstag, den 30.03.2010, 20:37 +0200 schrieb Fabien Parent:

> For the work to keep two code, i don't think it will increase a lot
> the maintenance.

OK, I will repeat myself: I don't see any glaring need to modify our API
to use C++0x features.  Most of the C++0x features will work just fine
on top of an API that is C++ 98 compatible.  There may be a few places
here and there where an additional piece of glue for C++0x may make
sense, but the bulk of the API is not going to be affected.

> > There is a standard way to do that once the standard is out, which is to
> > check the numeric value of the __cplusplus macro.
> 
> In fact, gcc doesn't define the value of the macro, so it get the
> default value of 1.
> If gcc was following the standard it would be possible to write this:
> 
> #if __cplusplus > 199711L
> // c++0x
> #else
> // c++98
> #endif
> 
> But it's not. I hope others compilers follow the standard more closer.

Dude, the standard has not even been released yet! :-)

I think this is all much ado about nothing.  Adopting C++0x goodies is
not going to require a redesign of gtkmm.  The changes I have in mind as
proposals for gtkmm 3 go much further than anything C++0x might do to
our API. :-)

--Daniel