Re: Will version 4.2 require C++11?

[John W. Eaton]

On 05/20/2016 12:45 PM, Rik wrote:
> 5/20/16
>
> jwe,
>
> I notice that the 'auto' keyword is now used in 5 places in liboctave:
>
> system/lo-sysdep.h:const auto octave_getcwd = octave::sys::getcwd;
> system/lo-sysdep.h:const auto octave_chdir = octave::sys::chdir;
> system/lo-sysdep.h:const auto octave_popen2 = octave::sys::popen2;
> util/oct-glob.h:const auto octave_fnmatch = octave::sys::fnmatch;
> util/oct-glob.h:const auto octave_glob = octave::sys::glob;
>
> That keyword is a C++11 feature.  Are we going to move to require that
> feature level for the development branch?

I still think that it makes sense to use some restraint with C++11 
features, but I'm OK with using auto for things like this.

OTOH, using auto to make aliases won't work for overloaded function 
names.  In those cases I just used inline wrapper functions.  If there 
is some problem with auto then we could always just use inline wrappers 
for these cases as well.

We are already using unique_ptr unconditionally and I haven't seen a lot 
of complaints about that.  So my guess is that C++11 is not causing a 
lot of trouble.

jwe