Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #39975, comment 9


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Nov 11, 2013, 9:38:16 AM (10 years ago)
Author:
ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • Ticket #39975, comment 9

    initial v1  
    11Replying to [comment:8 jfcaron@…]:
    2 > I would like to revive this ticket and add to the request that the flag not just be for --enable-cxx11, but to make root link against libcxx instead of libgcc.  The basic problem is that even if you compile the root port using a modern compiler that supports C++11, the libgcc library doesn't.  Try using a list initializer in a compiled ROOT macro and it doesn't compile. 
     2> I would like to revive this ticket and add to the request that the flag not just be for `--enable-cxx11`, but to make root link against libcxx instead of libgcc.  The basic problem is that even if you compile the root port using a modern compiler that supports C++11, the libgcc library doesn't.  Try using a list initializer in a compiled ROOT macro and it doesn't compile. 
    33>
    44> Whatever the ultimate solution is, I would like this line of code:
    55>
     6> {{{
    67> static const vector<int> v = {1,2,3};
     8> }}}
    79>
    8 > to compile using ACLiC with root fresh-from-macports without special gSystem->SetMakeSharedLib stuff.  Language support for C++11 without library support only takes us so far.
     10> to compile using ACLiC with root fresh-from-macports without `special gSystem->SetMakeSharedLib` stuff.  Language support for C++11 without library support only takes us so far.
    911
    1012Yes.  I suggest that we enable C++11 support based on what the C++ runtime is.  If the user is using libc++, we should enable it.