[Bro-Dev] Time for C++11?

[bernhard at ICSI.Berkeley.EDU]

I am generally all in favor for that. The only problem I see with this 
is, that a number of people still seem to be using RHEL 6 or similar to 
run Bro - at least I think I remember a few people in the last few 
months mentioning that on IRC.

However, if we offer binary packages for these old systems (as Vlad 
mentioned in his email) that might be ok. You still can install it 
without fidgeting on older systems that you might have to use in 
production and we still get to use the new features.

On 23 Jun 2014, at 8:43, Robin Sommer wrote:

> I'm guessing (and hearing :-) that most of us would like to start
> using C++11 in Bro's code base. With compiler support now apparently
> broad and robust, and our 2.4 dev cycle starting, I'm thinking it may
> be a good time now to make the move.
>
> What I propose is:
>
>   - We decide which minimum versions of GCC and clang (and their
>     stdlibs) we need to require.
>
>   - As a double-check, we survey the main OS distributions and make
>     sure they offer that by now.
>
>   - We put cmake magic in place to check for these versions. [1]
>
>   - We switch to compiling all C++ code with -std=c++11.
>
>   - We allow use of C++11 features in new code.
>
>   - Over time, we modernize old code as appropiate. Probably just
>     ad-hoc for the most part, as we touch it; but maybe we can also
>     put some time towards systematic changes, like with some of
>     clang's transition tools.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Robin
>
> [1] While we are at that, I suggest we also (re-)up the cmake version.
> Probably hard to find a C++11 tool chain with a many-years-old cmake.
>
>
> -- 
> Robin Sommer * Phone +1 (510) 722-6541 *     robin at icir.org
> ICSI/LBNL    * Fax   +1 (510) 666-2956 * www.icir.org/robin
> _______________________________________________
> bro-dev mailing list
> bro-dev at bro.org
> http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev