C++ Standard

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

C++ Standard

Grimm, Raphael (IAR)
Hi,
according to "Documentation/doc/Documentation/Preliminaries.txt" the
standard used in CGAL is c++03.
Is there a plan of moving to c++11 or higher as a required minimal function?

Best regards.

Raphael

--
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)
Institute for Anthropomatics and Robotics (IAR)
High Performance Humanoid Technologies (H2T)

Raphael Grimm (M.Sc.)
Research Scientist

Adenauerring 2
Building 50.20, Room 334
76131 Karlsruhe, Germany

Phone: +49 721 608-47133
Fax: +49 721 608-48270
Email: [hidden email]
Web: http://h2t.anthropomatik.kit.edu/

KIT - The Research University in the Helmholtz Association



smime.p7s (6K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: C++ Standard

Sebastien Loriot (GeometryFactory)
Note that this does not mean that the code is not working
with c++11 nor c++17. We simply offer support for old compilers.
At some point we'll probably move the minimal version to c++11
but nothing has been decided yet.

Sebastien.

On 06/05/2018 04:10 PM, Raphael Grimm wrote:

> Hi,
> according to "Documentation/doc/Documentation/Preliminaries.txt" the
> standard used in CGAL is c++03.
> Is there a plan of moving to c++11 or higher as a required minimal
> function?
>
> Best regards.
>
> Raphael
>

--
You are currently subscribed to cgal-discuss.
To unsubscribe or access the archives, go to
https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/info/cgal-discuss


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: C++ Standard

andreas.fabri

Hi Raphael,

I was also wondering if you were worried that we might advance too quickly
because for whatever reason you are bound to an old compiler.

Or if you find us too slow by not picking up lambdas, auto,....

Best,

Andreas


On 6/6/2018 10:18 AM, Sebastien Loriot (GeometryFactory) wrote:
Note that this does not mean that the code is not working
with c++11 nor c++17. We simply offer support for old compilers.
At some point we'll probably move the minimal version to c++11
but nothing has been decided yet.

Sebastien.

On 06/05/2018 04:10 PM, Raphael Grimm wrote:
Hi,
according to "Documentation/doc/Documentation/Preliminaries.txt" the standard used in CGAL is c++03.
Is there a plan of moving to c++11 or higher as a required minimal function?

Best regards.

Raphael



-- 
Andreas Fabri, PhD
Chief Officer, GeometryFactory
Editor, The CGAL Project

phone: +33.492.954.912    skype: andreas.fabri
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: C++ Standard

Grimm, Raphael (IAR)
Hi,

it is the second reason.
Though i can understand why libraries tend to stick to c++03 to prevent
breaking stuff, I do not know how many people still use a compiler
without c++11 support.
This also stops some developers (e.g. me) to participate working on a
library since all features have to be working for old c++ standards and
you have to be careful not to break for these old versions.

Furthermore the library can't benefit from new features (or has to add a
lot of #if ).
This makes the code harder to read and understand.

Since this library has breaking changes in new versions, I see no
problem in requiring a slightly newer c++ standard (c++11 is around 7
years old).

Best Regards,

Raphael


On 06.06.2018 17:29, Andreas Fabri wrote:

>
> Hi Raphael,
>
> I was also wondering if you were worried that we might advance too quickly
> because for whatever reason you are bound to an old compiler.
>
> Or if you find us too slow by not picking up lambdas, auto,....
>
> Best,
>
> Andreas
>
>
> On 6/6/2018 10:18 AM, Sebastien Loriot (GeometryFactory) wrote:
>> Note that this does not mean that the code is not working
>> with c++11 nor c++17. We simply offer support for old compilers.
>> At some point we'll probably move the minimal version to c++11
>> but nothing has been decided yet.
>>
>> Sebastien.
>>
>> On 06/05/2018 04:10 PM, Raphael Grimm wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> according to "Documentation/doc/Documentation/Preliminaries.txt" the
>>> standard used in CGAL is c++03.
>>> Is there a plan of moving to c++11 or higher as a required minimal
>>> function?
>>>
>>> Best regards.
>>>
>>> Raphael
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Andreas Fabri, PhD
> Chief Officer, GeometryFactory
> Editor, The CGAL Project
>
> phone: +33.492.954.912    skype: andreas.fabri
--
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)
Institute for Anthropomatics and Robotics (IAR)
High Performance Humanoid Technologies (H2T)

Raphael Grimm (M.Sc.)
Research Scientist

Adenauerring 2
Building 50.20, Room 334
76131 Karlsruhe, Germany

Phone: +49 721 608-47133
Fax: +49 721 608-48270
Email: [hidden email]
Web: http://h2t.anthropomatik.kit.edu/

KIT - The Research University in the Helmholtz Association



smime.p7s (6K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: C++ Standard

Sebastien Loriot (GeometryFactory)
Actually that the policy we have for new packages. They can use the new
standard since backward compatibility is then not an issue.

Sebastien.

On 06/07/2018 10:49 AM, Raphael Grimm wrote:

> Hi,
>
> it is the second reason.
> Though i can understand why libraries tend to stick to c++03 to prevent
> breaking stuff, I do not know how many people still use a compiler
> without c++11 support.
> This also stops some developers (e.g. me) to participate working on a
> library since all features have to be working for old c++ standards and
> you have to be careful not to break for these old versions.
>
> Furthermore the library can't benefit from new features (or has to add a
> lot of #if ).
> This makes the code harder to read and understand.
>
> Since this library has breaking changes in new versions, I see no
> problem in requiring a slightly newer c++ standard (c++11 is around 7
> years old).
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Raphael
>
>
> On 06.06.2018 17:29, Andreas Fabri wrote:
>>
>> Hi Raphael,
>>
>> I was also wondering if you were worried that we might advance too
>> quickly
>> because for whatever reason you are bound to an old compiler.
>>
>> Or if you find us too slow by not picking up lambdas, auto,....
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>>
>> On 6/6/2018 10:18 AM, Sebastien Loriot (GeometryFactory) wrote:
>>> Note that this does not mean that the code is not working
>>> with c++11 nor c++17. We simply offer support for old compilers.
>>> At some point we'll probably move the minimal version to c++11
>>> but nothing has been decided yet.
>>>
>>> Sebastien.
>>>
>>> On 06/05/2018 04:10 PM, Raphael Grimm wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> according to "Documentation/doc/Documentation/Preliminaries.txt" the
>>>> standard used in CGAL is c++03.
>>>> Is there a plan of moving to c++11 or higher as a required minimal
>>>> function?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards.
>>>>
>>>> Raphael
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Andreas Fabri, PhD
>> Chief Officer, GeometryFactory
>> Editor, The CGAL Project
>>
>> phone: +33.492.954.912    skype: andreas.fabri
>

--
You are currently subscribed to cgal-discuss.
To unsubscribe or access the archives, go to
https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/info/cgal-discuss


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: C++ Standard

andreas.fabri
In reply to this post by Grimm, Raphael (IAR)


It's always a question of balance to find. The switch to C++11 will come soon,
but there are always the latest language features which are the coolest.

Also there are more users than stopped-to-participants, and they are happy
not to be forced to upgrade user code with every release, and as Sebastien
said, we take care that CGAL compiles with modern compilers and switches
such as /std:c++latest.

Best,

Andreas

ps.:   Just out of curiosity: you would like to participate in which form?

On 6/7/2018 10:49 AM, Raphael Grimm wrote:
Hi,

it is the second reason.
Though i can understand why libraries tend to stick to c++03 to prevent breaking stuff, I do not know how many people still use a compiler without c++11 support.
This also stops some developers (e.g. me) to participate working on a library since all features have to be working for old c++ standards and you have to be careful not to break for these old versions.

Furthermore the library can't benefit from new features (or has to add a lot of #if ).
This makes the code harder to read and understand.

Since this library has breaking changes in new versions, I see no problem in requiring a slightly newer c++ standard (c++11 is around 7 years old).

Best Regards,

Raphael


On 06.06.2018 17:29, Andreas Fabri wrote:

Hi Raphael,

I was also wondering if you were worried that we might advance too quickly
because for whatever reason you are bound to an old compiler.

Or if you find us too slow by not picking up lambdas, auto,....

Best,

Andreas


On 6/6/2018 10:18 AM, Sebastien Loriot (GeometryFactory) wrote:
Note that this does not mean that the code is not working
with c++11 nor c++17. We simply offer support for old compilers.
At some point we'll probably move the minimal version to c++11
but nothing has been decided yet.

Sebastien.

On 06/05/2018 04:10 PM, Raphael Grimm wrote:
Hi,
according to "Documentation/doc/Documentation/Preliminaries.txt" the standard used in CGAL is c++03.
Is there a plan of moving to c++11 or higher as a required minimal function?

Best regards.

Raphael



-- 
Andreas Fabri, PhD
Chief Officer, GeometryFactory
Editor, The CGAL Project

phone: +33.492.954.912    skype: andreas.fabri


-- 
Andreas Fabri, PhD
Chief Officer, GeometryFactory
Editor, The CGAL Project

phone: +33.492.954.912    skype: andreas.fabri