Hello Jonathan. Thank you for the detailed clarification. > At what point did the GCC developers give up C++98 and start using C++11? For GCC 11. This is stated at https://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html Are you referring to these lines: ISO C++11 compiler > Necessary to bootstrap GCC. Versions of GCC prior to 11 also allow bootstrapping with an ISO C++98 > compiler,..... I thought bootstrapping and compilation are two separate things. In this context, are bootstrapping and compilation the same i.e. GCC is a compiler and the ISO C++11 compiler is being used to compile GCC? The exceptions are some tests which have .c extensions but get > compiled as both C and C++, when we want to test that both language > front-ends pass the test. Are you referring to files in the testsuite folders (example: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/pr65302_1.C)? Regards, Abdullah. On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 5:36 AM Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 09:04, Abdullah Siddiqui > <siddiquiabdullah92@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hello. > > > >> Hello. > >> > >> This question is for the developers of GCC: > >> > >> Which C++ version are you using to write the C++ code of the current GCC > >> version? > >> > >> > >> > >> C++11 > > > > > > I know Jonathan said earlier that GCC is implemented in C++11. However, > this page states the following: > > > >> As of version 4.8, GCC is (mostly) implemented in C++, C++98 > specifically. > > > > > > The current version is GCC 11.2, isn't it? > > That's the most recent released version. The Git master branch is > newer than that. > > Obviously a page talking about the status as of GCC 4.8 is going to be > outdated, because that was about 7 years ago. > > > At what point did the GCC developers give up C++98 and start using C++11? > > For GCC 11. This is stated at > https://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html > > > Is it correct to say that the C++ code of GCC is composed of both C++98 > and C++11? > > No, IMHO it's not correct. Some files might use an older C++98-ish > style, but they are all compiled as C++11 (or newer) and so it would > be wrong to say they are C++98. They can use 'auto' type deduction and > 'constexpr' and 'noexcept' so they are not C++98. > > > > Additionally, Jonathan also stated the following in one of his emails in > this thread: > > > >> It also looks like they haven't updated those numbers since April last > year, so it will wrongly count all .c files as C even the ones which > contain C++ instead. A huge number of files were renamed from .c to .cc > recently, because they contain C++ and so had a misleading .c extension. > That doesn't seem to be accounted for in those numbers. > > > > > > The page linked above also has a similar claim: > > > >> As of version 4.8, GCC is (mostly) implemented in C++, but we haven’t > renamed the source files. Hence you will see source files with a .c > extension throughout the source tree. These are generally handled by the > build system as C++, rather than C. > > > > > > Does this mean that ALL the files with the ".c" extension in the GCC > codebase are C++ files? > > No, because as I said previously (and you quoted above), they were > renamed from .c to .cc recently. Dave's page that talks about "as of > version 4.8" is very old now. My email from a few weeks ago is a lot > more current. You should use the current information, not the seven > year old information. > > > How shall I determine which files are C++ files and which ones are in C? > > In the current Git master branch, .c files are C and .cc files are > C++. The exceptions are some tests which have .c extensions but get > compiled as both C and C++, when we want to test that both language > front-ends pass the test. >
