Re: C++ standards discussion

[Ralph Lange via Core-talk <core-talk at aps.anl.gov>]

The bottom line was - as I remember - that C++14 doesn't add a lot to the table, whereas C++17 would be more interesting but exclude a lot of the current target architectures/compilers.

Your statement sounds right.

Cheers,
~Ralph

On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 11:29, Timo Korhonen via Core-talk <core-talk at aps.anl.gov> wrote:

Colleagues,

 

We had recently (if you can still call that “recent”) some discussion about which C++ standards would be required/accepted/recommended. Would somebody be so kind and help me refresh my memory where we ended with the discussion?

 

I remember that we stated that C++11 (compiler/toolchain) will be a requirement for EPICS 7.1 onwards. But were there any statements about C++14, C++17, and further? Anything more concrete than “we are looking into the issue”?

 

Why am I asking? We have many contributors in our (ESS) collaborating institutes, some of them very innovative 😉 and we would like to give them some rules and guidelines when they write code for ESS and possibly wider purposes.

 

At the moment it seems to me to say that it is OK to use C++11 features. Code that is not strictly limited to ESS applications (e.g., modules that might be contributed to the community) should not use newer features until further notice – I think?

Then we have to see what we can support internally at ESS but that is another thing.

 

Timo