Re: GNUstep: Specifying a minimum supported compiler version and using C++17 internally

[Riccardo Mottola]

Hi,

further reasoning on why not to use C++ in base code. It is like 
layering one language over the other, gnustep-base could be seen as the 
STL of obj-c.
It would bloat GNUstep even more, make code more complicated to read and 
write (many of us have a certain dislike for C++) for what benefit? 
Maybe simplicity of code, since we would wrapping libraries. But 
performance would yet to be proved in different situation. At worst, we 
should be able to match the same performance with some work.

C++ of portability issues, the reason why sometimes newer GCC versions 
aren't found on certain platform is because of STL pain! That should 
tell you something.

Hugo Melder wrote:
> Hey Riccardo,
>
> > Right now GNUstep is currently very portable because it supports 
> > "archaic" GCC. Not just GCC, I mean GCC 4.x and I stand for that.
>
> But why GCC 4.x? It was first released in March 10, 2006…

The question would be... why not? Old doesn't mean broken.
What features do new compiler really have that we need? Except new C++ 
stuff.

I can argument that gcc 4.x series (especially gcc 4.8) is a very good 
and stable compiler.

Not always there is the luxury of having a computer which can be easily 
updated to a current (or at least "ESR") version of Linux or BSD?
Simple example: owners of older nvidia cards are stuck to older releases 
of FreeBSD.

Jumping to GCC 8 would means for me to drop solaris builds, since only 
older compilers are available for them. gcc 4.6 on Solaris 9 and gcc 5.5 
on solaris 10.

Often you work with the OS the system came with, even if it could run 
something newer, it is dictated by other things or by mere fear to upgrade.
We do run on many embedded works

Around there there are a lot of Windows XP, Server 2008, Windows 7 boxen.

And many, many more systems! "Real world" has such a rich variety. FOSS 
should be proud to support it, although some have become a bit more 
commercial. Like Windows 11 which doesn't run on perfectly modern 
computers... or all the obsolescency Apple has forced on MacBooks!

Cheers,
Riccardo