standard way to require c++11?

[René J.V. Bertin]

On Tuesday April 14 2015 10:01:05 Brandon Allbery wrote:

>Why would they? They don't use it and you can get it from the gcc project
>easily enough.

Heh, no, it's us users who'd be using it (with all that implies O:-) )

>The main problem is that Apple's own C++ stuff is based on either a
>pre-C++11 libstdc++ or a C++11 libc++. You could probably build an official
>GPL3-d libstdc++ with C++11 support and it would probably even work (that

If that is equivalent to replacing the system libstdc++ with the one from port:gcc-4x then no, that doesn't work. Or rather, it seemed to work just fine until I had to reboot. Then things started to fail.
I seem to recall from the discussions at the time that there are indeed Apple additions to the system libstdc++ that are not in the FSF version.

>being one of the points of C++11) but might not be able to distribute the
>resulting objects/binaries because of conflicts between GPL and Apple's
>licenses.

How large an intersection would there be between the users on old(er) OS X versions who require a C++11 compatible libstdc++ and those who ship commercial binaries?

(PS: we're talking about the equivalent of Microsoft's msvc runtimes, no?)

R.