Sorry about the wrong list. Thanks for the information. On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 5:46 PM Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 22:35, Ted Toth via Gcc <gcc@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I work on a project with a large code base some of which is pretty old. > We > > are discussing adding -std=gnu++11 to our g++ compiles to be able to use > > newer classes/features but there are concerns that there could be > > unintended consequences. For existing code that doesn't use any new > > features/classes can it be expected that its function will not be > altered > > by use of this flag? Will we have to regression all of our c++ code? > > This question is not suitable for this mailing list, which is for > discussing development of GCC itself. Please use gcc-help instead, as > explained at https://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html (I've changed the mailing > list in the CC header already). > > Subclause [diff.cpp03.lex] in the C++ standard lists differences > between C++11 and C++03. In most cases the changes will cause new > diagnostics for code that is valid in C++03, but will not change the > meaning. The change that is most likely to compile without diagnostics > but behave differently at runtime is that destructors are implicitly > noexcept in C++11, so a destructor that throws an exception will call > std::terminate() unless you modify the code to add noexcept(false) to > the destructor. >
