From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Aug 30 14:55:46 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCDC57DF;
 Fri, 30 Aug 2013 14:55:46 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from theravensnest.org (theraven.freebsd.your.org [216.14.102.27])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7A2D2B17;
 Fri, 30 Aug 2013 14:55:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from c120.sec.cl.cam.ac.uk (c120.sec.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.18.120])
 (authenticated bits=0)
 by theravensnest.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r7UEtima009547
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
 Fri, 30 Aug 2013 14:55:45 GMT (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
Subject: Re: GCC withdraw
From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <5220B1F3.1030807@freebsd.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:55:43 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DB45213A-B039-4BEA-B218-F1199BFC5E36@FreeBSD.org>
References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com>
 <CAOFF+Z3vbOgMO7T-BKZnhKte6=rFoGcdYcft5kpAgNH2my1JKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <DC41B4BD-159A-408B-804A-0230F3E0E52B@FreeBSD.org>
 <201308291057.43027.jhb@freebsd.org>
 <8F836479-BC3A-4679-A7AA-3BCDD34AE6C5@FreeBSD.org>
 <52204746.2070900@freebsd.org>
 <ADADF693-B140-4C87-B464-9F139B31E7B5@FreeBSD.org>
 <5220B1F3.1030807@freebsd.org>
To: Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@FreeBSD.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Cc: "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman@gmail.com>, toolchain@FreeBSD.org,
 "freebsd-current@freebsd.org CURRENT" <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>,
 Boris Samorodov <bsam@passap.ru>, FreeBSD Current <current@FreeBSD.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 14:55:46 -0000

On 30 Aug 2013, at 15:53, Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> =
wrote:

> So the real driver here is switching to libc++. Is there really no way
> at all to use it with gcc? If, even with hacking, we could arrange =
that
> to work then it seems that all of our problems would go away.

If we can make our g++ compile C++11 code, then we can compile libc++ =
with g++.  This support requires significant modifications to the parser =
(it adds a second Turing-complete compile-time language, for one...) and =
so retrofitting C++11 support to g++ 4.2.1 is not going to happen.  It's =
taken upstream gcc a couple of years to get to the required level of =
support.  We don't have the manpower to replicate this.

David