On 27 December 2010 19:17, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> [ shrug... ] If it's not a keyword according to popularly available
> tools, then I really have zero interest in worrying about it. This
> is an exercise in making the headers useful in practice, not in academic
> standards conformance.
It isn't academic and I'm not just being pedantic, because the
standard introduces many new, useful features. A lot of popular C++
libraries optionally use C++0x through the use of conditional
compilation. For example, my distro's libstdc++ standard library
(which is mostly header-based due to the fact that it is mostly
comprised of templates and inline functions) has many #ifdefs, so that
things like move constructors (a big performance win for standard
library containers) are available. It just seems prudent to assume
that if any of these pg headers are being included in C++ TUs, they
might well be using C++0x.
--
Regards,
Peter Geoghegan