standard way to require c++11?

[Michael Dickens]

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015, at 01:54 PM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Thursday March 19 2015 17:01:02 Chris Jones wrote:
> 
> > Using gcc is a bad idea, this can lead to C++ runtime issues.
> 
> On newer OS X versions where libc++ is the default (or only) C++ runtime.

Exactly. If we key off of {${configure.cxx_stdlib} eq "libstdc++"}, then
I think this can be made to work; er, mostly.

> > Which means newer systems use the compatible system clang compiler, and 
> > older system use the macports clang compiler. I think this is the 'best 
> > effort' solution. It doesn't work on OSX10.6 though, there we simply 
> > given up support, as least with the root6 port.
> 
> I don't see what's against using port:gcc4x on 10.6 or 10.7 as long as
> you don't need Apple-specific compiler extensions (probably including
> universal builds). It's how I built relatively complex ports like
> kdevplatform and kdevelop, without any issues. Oh, and (favourite topic
> of mine), it's also a lot faster than the clang ports O:-)
> I've never managed to use the blacklisting feature to force port to use
> g++-mp-4.{7,8,9}, though.

Yes to all the above. In my test (just now), I can get GCC 4.[789] via:
{{{
    compiler.fallback-append macports-gcc-4.9 macports-gcc-4.8
    macports-gcc-4.7
}}}
where this list is in priority order, too. - MLD