standard way to require c++11?

[René J.V. Bertin]

On Tuesday April 14 2015 10:32:32 Brandon Allbery wrote:

>I was not talking about actually replacing the system libstdc++; you get
>what you deserve if you do that. I would expect something linking against

:)

>an alternative libstdc++ to have some chance to work, though.

I've used macports-gcc-4.x to build certain ports with C++11 code of non-trivial complexity (QtCurve, KDevelop) on 10.6 and never ran into the slightest issue because of it.

>I was thinking more [...] (b) tossing the result on a web page for
>others to download instead of having to do the whole weird setup themselves.

Sounds like a special case of Finagle's law to me ;)

>Not exactly, as that includes libc. This is just the glue that allows C++

Ah, right.

R