You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@trafficserver.apache.org by Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> on 2018/05/07 15:05:31 UTC
[PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for C++17 support.
-Bryan
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Alan Carroll <so...@oath.com>.
+1
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 5:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> Devtoolset 7 for RHEL6 has gcc 7.
>
> -Bryan
>
>
> On May 7, 2018, at 4:10 PM, Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:07 AM Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would
>> require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for
>> C++17 support.
>>
>>
> What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
>
>
>> -Bryan
>
>
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org>.
Devtoolset 7 for RHEL6 has gcc 7.
-Bryan
> On May 7, 2018, at 4:10 PM, Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:07 AM Bryan Call <bcall@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for C++17 support.
>
>
> What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
>
> -Bryan
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On May 9, 2018, at 1:13 AM, Igor Galić <ig...@brainsware.at> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>>> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would
>>>>> require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for
>>>>> C++17 support.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Also, since we went to C++11 a while ago, we already had to give up on the
>>> CentOS6 native tool chain (so, for the last year or so, we’ve already
>>> required Devtoolset to be used). This
>>
>>
>> Yeah, this seems fine to me.
>>
>>
>>> change would force us to update to devtoolset-7 on RHEL platforms, and
>>> might make some older debian platforms impossible to support in any
>>> reasonable way (which I’m ok with).
>
> From what i gather, this would also mean a minimum of FreeBSD 12.0, or else, building from ports.
> Given that the target is 8.0, this seems quite fine.
As it turns out, FreeBSD11 has a clang-5.0 package already, which is what we’re now using on the CI, and it’s working fine.
Cheers,
— leif
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Chris Lemmons <al...@gmail.com>.
With all the benefits that come with 17, I think there's not a whole
lot of point looking backward on this one. There's enough OS support
that we can make it happen.
+1
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 1:13 AM, Igor Galić <ig...@brainsware.at> wrote:
>
>
>> > >> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would
>> > >> require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for
>> > >> C++17 support.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > > What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Also, since we went to C++11 a while ago, we already had to give up on the
>> > CentOS6 native tool chain (so, for the last year or so, we’ve already
>> > required Devtoolset to be used). This
>>
>>
>> Yeah, this seems fine to me.
>>
>>
>> > change would force us to update to devtoolset-7 on RHEL platforms, and
>> > might make some older debian platforms impossible to support in any
>> > reasonable way (which I’m ok with).
>
> From what i gather, this would also mean a minimum of FreeBSD 12.0, or else, building from ports.
> Given that the target is 8.0, this seems quite fine.
>
>
> --
> --
> Igor Galić
>
> Tel.at: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
> Tel.de: +49 (0) 162 383 26 98
> Web: https://brainsware.at/
>
> Checkout https://sealas.at/ The first end-to-end encrypted open-source accounting software!
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Igor Galić <ig...@brainsware.at>.
> > >> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would
> > >> require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for
> > >> C++17 support.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
> >
> >
> >
> > Also, since we went to C++11 a while ago, we already had to give up on the
> > CentOS6 native tool chain (so, for the last year or so, we’ve already
> > required Devtoolset to be used). This
>
>
> Yeah, this seems fine to me.
>
>
> > change would force us to update to devtoolset-7 on RHEL platforms, and
> > might make some older debian platforms impossible to support in any
> > reasonable way (which I’m ok with).
From what i gather, this would also mean a minimum of FreeBSD 12.0, or else, building from ports.
Given that the target is 8.0, this seems quite fine.
--
--
Igor Galić
Tel.at: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Tel.de: +49 (0) 162 383 26 98
Web: https://brainsware.at/
Checkout https://sealas.at/ The first end-to-end encrypted open-source accounting software!
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org>.
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 9:16 AM Alan Carroll
<so...@oath.com.invalid> wrote:
> We're already building on some platforms with C++17, so I don't think we'll
> need to do any code updates. The goal is to make future coding easier by
>
> 1) Removing string_view and ink_std_compat.h
> 2) Enable use of C++17 headers like string_view and file_system.
> 3) Have a single consistent C++ standard (instead of the 11/14/17/ mix).
>
>
So it sounds like there is some plan to unify under C++17 instead of just
allowing organic code growth. I can get on board with that.
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:43 AM Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On May 7, 2018, at 4:10 PM, Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:07 AM Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This
> > would
> > > >> require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions
> > for
> > > >> C++17 support.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > > What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, since we went to C++11 a while ago, we already had to give up on
> > the
> > > CentOS6 native tool chain (so, for the last year or so, we’ve already
> > > required Devtoolset to be used). This
> >
> >
> > Yeah, this seems fine to me.
> >
> >
> > > change would force us to update to devtoolset-7 on RHEL platforms, and
> > > might make some older debian platforms impossible to support in any
> > > reasonable way (which I’m ok with).
> > >
> > >
> > How do the debian package maintainers feel about that?
> >
> > Do we plan to have concerted efforts to go through the code and update to
> > C++17 paradigms? Or is this to make the new coding work easier?
> >
> > I plan on writing some instructions for getting toolchains setup for the
> > > platforms where it is possible.
> > >
> > > +1 from me btw.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > — Leif
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Alan Carroll <so...@oath.com.INVALID>.
We're already building on some platforms with C++17, so I don't think we'll
need to do any code updates. The goal is to make future coding easier by
1) Removing string_view and ink_std_compat.h
2) Enable use of C++17 headers like string_view and file_system.
3) Have a single consistent C++ standard (instead of the 11/14/17/ mix).
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:43 AM Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > On May 7, 2018, at 4:10 PM, Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:07 AM Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This
> would
> > >> require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions
> for
> > >> C++17 support.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
> >
> >
> >
> > Also, since we went to C++11 a while ago, we already had to give up on
> the
> > CentOS6 native tool chain (so, for the last year or so, we’ve already
> > required Devtoolset to be used). This
>
>
> Yeah, this seems fine to me.
>
>
> > change would force us to update to devtoolset-7 on RHEL platforms, and
> > might make some older debian platforms impossible to support in any
> > reasonable way (which I’m ok with).
> >
> >
> How do the debian package maintainers feel about that?
>
> Do we plan to have concerted efforts to go through the code and update to
> C++17 paradigms? Or is this to make the new coding work easier?
>
> I plan on writing some instructions for getting toolchains setup for the
> > platforms where it is possible.
> >
> > +1 from me btw.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > — Leif
> >
> >
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org>.
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:43 AM Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> > On May 7, 2018, at 4:10 PM, Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:07 AM Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would
> >> require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for
> >> C++17 support.
> >>
> >>
> > What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
>
>
>
> Also, since we went to C++11 a while ago, we already had to give up on the
> CentOS6 native tool chain (so, for the last year or so, we’ve already
> required Devtoolset to be used). This
Yeah, this seems fine to me.
> change would force us to update to devtoolset-7 on RHEL platforms, and
> might make some older debian platforms impossible to support in any
> reasonable way (which I’m ok with).
>
>
How do the debian package maintainers feel about that?
Do we plan to have concerted efforts to go through the code and update to
C++17 paradigms? Or is this to make the new coding work easier?
I plan on writing some instructions for getting toolchains setup for the
> platforms where it is possible.
>
> +1 from me btw.
>
> Cheers,
>
> — Leif
>
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On May 7, 2018, at 4:10 PM, Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:07 AM Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would
>> require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for
>> C++17 support.
>>
>>
> What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
Also, since we went to C++11 a while ago, we already had to give up on the CentOS6 native tool chain (so, for the last year or so, we’ve already required Devtoolset to be used). This change would force us to update to devtoolset-7 on RHEL platforms, and might make some older debian platforms impossible to support in any reasonable way (which I’m ok with).
I plan on writing some instructions for getting toolchains setup for the platforms where it is possible.
+1 from me btw.
Cheers,
— Leif
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org>.
Devtoolset 7 for RHEL6 has gcc 7.
-Bryan
> On May 7, 2018, at 4:10 PM, Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:07 AM Bryan Call <bcall@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for C++17 support.
>
>
> What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
>
> -Bryan
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org>.
On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:07 AM Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would
> require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for
> C++17 support.
>
>
What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
> -Bryan
Re: [PROPOSAL] C++17, gcc 7, and clang 5 for ATS 8.0.0
Posted by Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org>.
On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:07 AM Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> I would like to propose that we move to C++17 for ATS 8.0.0. This would
> require us to move to gcc 7, clang 5, and icc 18 as minimum versions for
> C++17 support.
>
>
What does this move our minimum EL distro to? Can we still use 6?
> -Bryan