From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77170138334 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 12:47:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 76078E0C50; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 12:46:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26D8FE09E3 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 12:46:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.165] (ool-4a5821a2.dyn.optonline.net [74.88.33.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ryao) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 37A3F335C9F for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 12:46:52 +0000 (UTC) From: Richard Yao Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 08:46:46 -0400 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ standard in ebuilds Message-Id: <812A3F5E-AA6A-4FFA-BF70-EE8B6565A6DF@gentoo.org> References: <20180917153738.GA5402@gentoo.org> <3229421.CvTK6SVxHl@tp> In-Reply-To: <3229421.CvTK6SVxHl@tp> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16A366) X-Archives-Salt: 0df070ca-e338-4edd-a4a9-772dec1b8a9e X-Archives-Hash: 4b260ff802c21772eb718b899be38284 > On Sep 17, 2018, at 12:40 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov w= rote: >=20 > I'd prefer to wait another replies on the list for the main theme of this e= - > mail, but this problem also affects C (so, as **c**flags and C standards),= so=20 > solution shoudn't be c++ specific, imho. You would think that, but the C standard version does not effect ABI compati= bility. We had a very long discussion about this in OpenZFS because the othe= r platforms were using C99 while we had backported everything to C89 on Linu= x because of the Linux kernel. No one could find a single example of ABI bre= akage caused by mixing and matching C89 and C99 (C99 LKM and C89 kernel). Af= ter a few years of not a single example being raised, the Linux team lead op= ted to adopt C99. Now, there are flags affecting the ABI, but those are separate from the C st= andard version. As for C++, mixing standard versions does go badly because n= ew language features require ABI changes. >=20 >=20 >=20