(original) (raw)
Thanks for the update Zachary!
I indeed missed the LLVM-Dev meeting, so this is a welcome bit of news for me!
I’m glad we decided to go with the cmake-warning mechanism. Was there ever any discussion about a rolling warning system as I proposed here? https://reviews.llvm.org/D47073
It had received positive feedback on the mailing list, though Chandler had/has some reservations. IMO, it is a way of going about this that prevents this discussion from being so contentious in the future.
-Erich
From: cfe-dev \[mailto:cfe-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org\]
On Behalf Of Zachary Turner via cfe-dev
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 9:58 AM
To: llvm-dev ; Clang Dev
Subject: \[cfe-dev\] LLVM C++14/C++17 BoF - Summary
For those of you who were not able to attend the LLVM Developer Meeting (and as a recap for those who were), we had a productive BoF about enabling C++14 or C++17 in LLVM. The outcome of this can be generally summarized as:
\* There were no major objections to moving to C++14 / C++17 "as soon as possible"
\* "As soon as possible" is not immediately, but we are currently targeting March of 2019 due to some downstream contributors' needing to resolve some blockages before it can be possible.
\* There did not seem to be a strong sentiment that we should only move to C++14, so for the sake of this discussion we're assuming 17 unless someone presents a strong argument why 17 is \*less\* desirable than 14.
Minimum Compiler Versions for "Reasonable C++17 Support" (Mostly everything minus CTAD)
GCC - Version 7 \[1\] (Version 8 for CTAD)
Clang - Version 4 \[2\] (Version 5 for CTAD)
MSVC - 2017 Update 5 \[3\] (Update 7 for CTAD)
We plan to add a CMake warning if your compiler version is below these versions soon. Around January, we will promote this to a CMake error which you must manually override by passing -DCMAKE\_ALLLOW\_DEPRECATED\_COMPILER.
If I'm forgetting anything or misrepresenting anything that was said at the BoF please feel free to correct me.