[gdal-dev] Starting a discussion on style and coding guidelines

[Ray Gardener]

How about C++11 threads?

Ray


On 5/5/2016, Thursday 12:43 PM, Mark Coletti wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Even Rouault 
> <even.rouault at spatialys.com <mailto:even.rouault at spatialys.com>> wrote:
>
>     [...]
>     That would be interesting if you (or anyone) could list which
>     C++11 features would be killer features
>     to justify the upgrade to C++11 vs the potential pains that such a
>     move might cause (especially
>     as I raised in other emails, given the fact that GDAL uses a
>     number of other libs and is used by a number
>     of other libs) [...]
>
>
> This is an off the cuff list of C++-11 niceties, and by no means 
> exhaustive:
>
> - std::move()
> - *lambda expressions*
> - auto keyword
> - native smart pointer support, such as std::unique_ptr and 
> std::shared_ptr (though there's always the Boost fallback)
> - concurrency API
> - nullptr
>
> Also, it's been many, many years since I last looked at GDAL/OGR 
> source.  When I did I noted a lot of C-style I/O calls instead of 
> using C++ equivalents.  Is that still the case?  If so, that's one 
> area ripe for refactoring.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
> -- 
> mcoletti at gmail.com <mailto:mcoletti at gmail.com>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20160505/a5aaa011/attachment.html>