From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Thu Oct 5 23:18:52 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4AB5E45358 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 23:18:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A162065F99 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 23:18:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id A082BE45357; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 23:18:52 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0105E45356 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 23:18:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-it0-x233.google.com (mail-it0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65BF865F98 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 23:18:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-it0-x233.google.com with SMTP id c195so3379295itb.4 for ; Thu, 05 Oct 2017 16:18:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Dfd7GoF/4njV66raUefZAgfbwMinWadvJvH111b2gqo=; b=utfvNAje5YIN4z5Bk1d8FN99TpTDaOnrOWYFbp/nQlM3Ueu85DzL0/nzYSojesAiw2 eQyJDmW73fy6Xc4WH+oiq0dwEYBkQaAXac2Ku5YPjJuiLfDvLEOB7jI696ii0G6sCNGP c4gEBXso/Z3rrmmDGtCK+Bb2XJhwYHg+eP7/FoZGYFQmL64OkddvvcVjN3byqZ+Bz/2o A5rS3KfgxYGCl4lwVCiftM9lcSAlZjaTf1jO/SSgQgShdUORQoIl1OqlZXbAM3P/8bM2 SFmN8btDQBGsil1PKZdUggG9RV1QMv69xeRPYWmLKBl5zNkAq/yv7ZeXoRcPCDjGrUes ll1w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject :to; bh=Dfd7GoF/4njV66raUefZAgfbwMinWadvJvH111b2gqo=; b=EuSCqEkJuCKOA+x3fwrVpYgSbykZldKq1nolWCHZo2H7oVwrydJZUDTfOtwNZcLa7j i/qPl+vtSeXtQcYeeZL9CdfQ8flaqOrOqfJEPRa8ItYpd5R693NqTRrjgb23lp9Tdb+0 0Sd85phqXjhiThe8TfPZbzvMUMRfMoIK5qSY+hDahB5a/LHpH9TRsNRzjkP70j8/the1 apQW90OjhHQQrCKqhCuQePDgfWZGW1w0lLbTuEaypgYiOvnOh4EdkTpw7D2yxQyTu74a +YNRAFtvyV/O9ovERa0t8XxoekKrI3lS/dMwggOXYGp3UGVQA4Je8k/RUmajtbtGjIJD 5ZkA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaWLYyy9G/1D1PiiFSJrBUyhvrOpKO9mlKp5qK5q/aru9ZypX/Tk HHYTM1r2QMQQ0HKDOPSKVo/MTOWbHF0IHnmc/ppqCQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QA8OLqfzKoFEb9hI60nrFVO/kiCz2b08c5GNpIrNVSxfETNPJEAcFZixpjBjGJzSVmHoQ+EAe71SjMkJdHbiPs= X-Received: by 10.36.203.3 with SMTP id u3mr203765itg.136.1507245531523; Thu, 05 Oct 2017 16:18:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.79.94.130 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 16:18:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [2607:fb10:7021:1::5304] From: Warner Losh Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 16:18:50 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: avhoH5eDQ8otAcsLHYHxVskphnk Message-ID: Subject: C++11 Requirement for base To: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2017 23:18:52 -0000 It's desirable that C++11 be fully supported in base. I'd like that to become a hard requirement soon. The jemalloc folks would like to simplify their code by using C++11 (in such a way that C++ wouldn't be required for C programs). That is the forcing function to my this message. The biggest problem doing that is gcc 4.2 still being required for trailing architectures. I'd like to move from vague plans of "eventually" or "before 12" to be a specific date. I'd propose 12/31/17 as the deadline for the trailing architectures to have in place a viable external toolchain support for this as I'd like to remove gcc 4.2 then as well. Comments? Warner