-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38.7k
build: force a c++ standard to be specified #9831
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Newer compilers may switch to newer standards by default. For example, gcc6 uses std=gnu++14 by default.
|
Yes - the rationale for this is that we want to avoid c++14 use to creep into the source code before we've decided we want c++14. I think it's too soon for that. It'd be nice to not bump our minimum clang/g++ requirements for a while. |
|
Concept ACK |
|
Tested ACK 9829c54: |
|
And it is still passed on systems where it is needed. The only difference here is a configure output missing the following line: ACK 9829c54 |
I think that's to be expected, because we no longer care about the default, we always specify it. |
|
Concept ACK |
|
@paveljanik Yes, that's the intended change. |
9829c54 build: force a c++ standard to be specified (Cory Fields)
Build system improvements Includes commits cherry-picked from the following upstream PRs: - bitcoin/bitcoin#6978 - Only the first commit (second is for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#7059 - bitcoin/bitcoin#7603 - Only the first commit (the rest are for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#7954 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8314 - Only the second commit (first is for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#8504 - Only the first commit (second was undoing something we didn't have) - bitcoin/bitcoin#8520 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8563 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8249 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9156 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9831 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9789 - bitcoin/bitcoin#10766 Part of #2074.
Build system improvements Includes commits cherry-picked from the following upstream PRs: - bitcoin/bitcoin#6978 - Only the first commit (second is for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#7059 - bitcoin/bitcoin#7603 - Only the first commit (without the `BITCOIN_QT_BIN` variable; the rest are for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#7954 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8314 - Only the second commit (first is for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#8504 - Only the first commit (second was undoing something we didn't have) - bitcoin/bitcoin#8520 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8563 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8249 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9156 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9831 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9789 - bitcoin/bitcoin#10766 Part of #2074.
Build system improvements Includes commits cherry-picked from the following upstream PRs: - bitcoin/bitcoin#6978 - Only the first commit (second is for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#7059 - bitcoin/bitcoin#7603 - Only the first commit (without the `BITCOIN_QT_BIN` variable; the rest are for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#7954 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8314 - Only the second commit (first is for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#8504 - Only the first commit (second was undoing something we didn't have) - bitcoin/bitcoin#8520 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8563 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8249 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9156 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9831 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9789 - bitcoin/bitcoin#10766 Part of #2074.
Build system improvements Includes commits cherry-picked from the following upstream PRs: - bitcoin/bitcoin#6978 - Only the first commit (second is for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#7059 - bitcoin/bitcoin#7603 - Only the first commit (without the `BITCOIN_QT_BIN` variable; the rest are for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#7954 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8314 - Only the second commit (first is for QT) - bitcoin/bitcoin#8504 - Only the first commit (second was undoing something we didn't have) - bitcoin/bitcoin#8520 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8563 - bitcoin/bitcoin#8249 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9156 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9831 - bitcoin/bitcoin#9789 - bitcoin/bitcoin#10766 Part of #2074. # Conflicts: # configure.ac # src/Makefile.am # src/Makefile.gtest.include # src/Makefile.test.include # zcutil/build.sh
@laanwj suggested this here #9753 (comment).
Newer compilers may switch to newer standards by default. For example, gcc6 uses std=gnu++14 by default.
Note that this makes testing c++14 impractical. Until we're ready to investigate that transition, I don't think that's a problem.
I'll attempt to upstream the macro changes post-merge.