Re: [boost] New libraries implementing C++11 features in C++03

Subject: Re: [boost] New libraries implementing C++11 features in C++03
From: Lorenzo Caminiti (lorcaminiti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-28 05:51:31

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Lorenzo Caminiti
<lorcaminiti_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Thomas Klimpel
> <Thomas.Klimpel_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Lorenzo Caminiti wrote:
>>> I wish I had find this link sooner not because it settle the
>>> discussion but because IMO it provides relevant input:
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C++0xCompilerSupport
>>>
>>> C++11 feature: Lambda expressions and closures
>>> N-papers: v0.9: N2550, v1.0: N2658, v1.1: N2927
>>> HP aCC: No support
>>> EDG eccp: 4.1(v0.9)
>>> GCC: 4.5(v0.9)
>>> Intel C++: 11.0(v0.9), 12.0(v1.0)
>>> MSVC: 10.0(v1.0), 11.0(v1.1)
>>> IBM XLC++: No support
>>> Sun/ Oracle C++: No support
>>> C++ Builder 2009/10: No support
>>> Digital Mars C++: No support
>>> Clang: No support
>>
>> I'm not sure this list of compilers is relevant. Let's shorten the list to
>>
>> GCC: 4.5(v0.9)
>> Intel C++: 11.0(v0.9), 12.0(v1.0)
>> MSVC: 10.0(v1.0), 11.0(v1.1)
>> IBM XLC++: No support
>> Clang: No support
>>
>> because these compilers at least seem to be "actively" maintained. (I based this conclusion on the fact that the cited page links to relevant information for these compilers.) These compilers are also included in the boost test matrix, which further strengthens my impression that these are "relevant" compilers.
>
> Makes sense.
>
>> I remember that IBM XLC++ had non-standard conform name lookup in the past, I wonder whether this is still the case. Even so the resulting error were normally easy to fix, trying to fix these errors for a library like Boost.Proto seems like a daunting task. So XLC++ should only be considered relevant if the non-standard conform name lookup is fixed.
>
> Could anyone please check if Boost.Local in its current implementation
> compiles on IBM XLC++?
>
>> And Clang is at least working on lambda support,
>
> Yes, I was able to find this (sorry in advance if it turns out to be
> not the very latest info):
> http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/review/google/gsoc2011/gigabytes/1
>
>> so it won't be too long before it supports this. But of course, even after Clang supports it, some time will still pass before it is also available for apple developers.
>
> I can confirm that Vicente has tried Boost.Local on both Darwin and Clang
>
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba
> <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> - Did you try to use the library?  With what compiler?  Did you have any
>>> problems?
>>
>> I have compiled the examples with darwin 4.2.1, clang-2.9,3.0 with and
>> without c++0x enabled.

I've also asked the current status of compiler support for C++11
lambdas to the larger community:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c++.moderated/browse_thread/thread/eba71b41de6a65ba#

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c++/browse_thread/thread/39857289dfd29712#

HTH,
--Lorenzo