[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #8906] configure check support for c11 and

From: Carnë Draug
Subject: [Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #8906] configure check support for c11 and c++11
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:04:59 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0 Iceweasel/38.6.0

Follow-up Comment #6, patch #8906 (project octave):

> Something like this would be cleaner. 

But won't CXXFLAGS already have other flags in there? Won't that copy the
other non c++11 related flags? Also, shouldn't we keep the c++11 flags on
CXXFLAGS for the rest of configure?

My understanding of the multiple flag-related variavles in configure.ac (just
to make sure I understand it well, I may not):

1) CXXFLAGS starts with the user defined flags. Throughout configure, flags
are added to CXXFLAGS as required, and used to continue the configure checks.
At the end of configure, they are restored to their initial value and then
appended to the end of flags actually used during compilation.

2) XTRA_CXXFLAGS start empty. Each time a configure check adds a new flag, it
is also added here (as well as CXXFLAGS). In the end, these are the start of
the flags used for compilation. 

> I have no objection to using AX_CXX_COMPILE_STDCXX, but it doesn't handle
the C11 option that you also wanted to add.

Yes. I was thinking of writing a AX_CXX_COMPILE_STDC that follows the same
design. But wanted to know if that design was worth following for us.

> Most of the complexity of AX_CXX_COMPILE_STDCXX is checking various C++11
features to make sure the compiler actually does support all of C++11, do we
care about that at this point?

Well, it's already there for the taking so why not use it? And it could also
be used to check for c++14 later.


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]