Messages

1

General / Re: C++11 and SFML 2.0

« on: May 03, 2013, 02:56:51 pm »

Thanks, but my understanding is that although available, C++11 is not the default.  (See: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Standards.html , which states: "The default, if no C++ language dialect options are given, is -std=gnu++98."  ISTR seeing - but can't find - another authoritative quote stating, effectively, that it was not likely to become so anytime soon.)

And I'm concerned about the binary compat issues.  See e.g.:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2013-03/msg00035.html

http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Cxx11AbiCompatibility

Alec

2

General / Re: C++11 and SFML 2.0

« on: May 03, 2013, 12:58:37 pm »

Continuing on this theme.  I'd like to build SFML 2.0 on Linux, initially w/ gcc, and ideally w/ make.  I asked on a separate thread about this, and the helpful reply pointed me towards a route using CMake.  Fine.  But I'd like further help on this wrt the use of C++11.  That is, my app code would be built w/ C++11.  Should SFML be built as C++11 (and if so how do I supply the parameter(s) for this?  And for all the libs that SFML uses, should they also be built and installed using a C++11 compiler; or would installation of the dependent libs from packages (probably built w/ C and/or C++ elements)  a) be well-defined, and expected to work, or b) work in practice, but in theory use undefined behaviour, or c) be unreliable at best?

TIA,

Alec

3

General discussions / Re: SFML 2 and its new website released

« on: April 30, 2013, 10:41:49 pm »

Thanks for this.  (I guess that CMake itself will be available wherever wanted.)

4

General discussions / Re: SFML 2 and its new website released

« on: April 30, 2013, 08:33:01 pm »

Congratulations, and thanks.

Any chance of a download for Linux, which would require little more than a ,/configure, make, make install to work?  (W/ some brief docs on usage of this download, including required dependencies.)