cxx11-1.1 & gcc

[Marcus Calhoun-Lopez]

My current plan for octave is essentially:
    PortGroup           compilers  1.0
    PortGroup           cxx11 1.1
    compiler.blacklist-delete *gcc*
    compilers.setup ...

This seems reasonable for the probably small number of ports that are isolated enough
to use GCC even when configure.cxx_stdlib is libc++.

So far, I haven’t run into any problems, but the buildbots have not had a chance to prove
me wrong yet.

Thanks,
Marcus

> On Feb 23, 2017, at 3:26 AM, Mojca Miklavec <mojca at macports.org> wrote:
> 
> Dear Marcus,
> 
> After you did the changes in cmake 1.1 I discovered the following in your port:
> 
> 
> # see https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/octave-maintainers/2016-05/msg00286.html
> #PortGroup           cxx11 1.0
> # Octave requires c++-11 but can not use cxx11 PortGroup because Octave also
> #    requires fortran from gcc
> # Compilers supporting C++11 are GCC >= 4.6 and clang >= 3.3.
> # See https://trac.macports.org/ticket/53044 for restricting clang
> versions further
> PortGroup compiler_blacklist_versions 1.0
> compiler.blacklist-append   {*gcc-3*} {*gcc-4.[0-6]} {clang < 700} cc
> 
> ... followed by some way more complex code.
> 
> Since the number of ports using the new cxx11-1.0 PG is still pretty
> low and thus the changes would not affect too many ports (and
> hopefully not break any of them), I was wondering if it would make
> sense to try incorporating some of code from octave to that PortGroup,
> so that ports that need Fortran could just include the PortGroup and
> be done with it.
> 
> What I mean is adding a slightly less aggressive blacklisting of gcc
> compilers and allow gcc >= 4.7 under some special circumstances.
> 
> I don't know if that's doable or reasonable, it's just a thought.
> 
> I'll keep testing your idea of linking against gcc's stdlib.
> 
> Mojca