Re: [sigc] C++0x lambdas

[Rui Maciel <rui maciel gmail com>]

On 01/08/2012 03:30 PM, Murray Cumming wrote:
> And I guess that it's  onsidered acceptable to use -std=c++0x with a
> library that was not compiled with that option? Then, yes, that does
> mean that a configure check won't be enough.
>
> Maybe we can just put this in a separate header that people must
> explicitly include if they need it?
>
> However, it would still need a configure check, just so we can have a
> test for it when appropriate.

Here is a mad idea: what about creating a v3.0 branch, with the purpose 
of providing a libsigc++ version which extensively relied on C++11 
features?

Among the advantages, this would prevent any software package which 
currently relies on the v2 branch from breaking.

It would also be simpler to add support for C++11 in libsigc++, both in 
terms of backward compatibility and convoluted configure/compiler 
checks.  After all, a programmer would only use the v3.0 branch if he 
intentionally required C++11 features, which he would be forced to check 
prior to using libsigc++.

Then, if a particular compiler failed to support libsigc++ v3 then 
either the onus to fix any problem would be on the compiler developer or 
the developer would be compelled to upgrade/switch to a compiler which 
actually supported C++11.


How about it?  Any thoughts?
Rui Maciel