C++17 support?

Patrick Venture venture at google.com
Tue Sep 11 06:11:20 AEST 2018

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 12:58 PM Vernon Mauery
<vernon.mauery at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 10-Sep-2018 09:00 AM, Brad Bishop wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On Sep 10, 2018, at 3:06 AM, Lei YU <mine260309 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Now we are using GCC 7.3 and it has full C++17 support, although it is
> >> [experimental][1]
> >>
> >> Is it suitable for a product to use C++17 instead of C++14 in repos?
> >
> >It depends on your tolerance for risk and support structure.  So likely
> >the answer depends on who you ask.
> The rework of the IPMI daemon queue/registration/handler stuff I am
> working on is moving onto using c++17 only.
> Keep in mind that although the compiler has support for the new c++17
> language constructs, the header library support still has not moved
> everything over from experimental to the std namespace. So even if you
> are specifying -std=c++17 on the command line, you may need to include
> the experimental header files for now.

Sad, but true.

> >> So I would like to use C++17 in this repo, which then does not require any
> >> code change to enable LinkTimeOptimization.
> >
> >I don’t have any problem with this.  In fact I much prefer we are at the
> >bleeding edge.  I know that makes it hard for our users (system integrators)
> >to be confident but soon-ish we’ll have a stable release for those with lower
> >risk tolerance.
> I like moving to c++17 and would suggest that we urge maintainers to
> move sooner rather than later to catch and differences during
> development rather than during a release cycle.

I've pushed a patch for review in the daemons I help, I think it's a
good idea to give it a shot now.

> --Vernon

More information about the openbmc mailing list