Grep0018 — Modernize C++ #19
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My biggest gripe with this grep is that it's not clear what the action is if we finalize it. I like the move to C++11, but I don't think we need to retro-change all of the existing code, unless it's using Boost pointers and the like. I would suggest that all the small stuff (const, constexpr, etc.) becomes a recommendation for future code, but not necessarily something we have to change everywhere.
grep-0018-modernize-c++.md
Outdated
| * What level of ABI guarantee does GNU Radio make between and within | ||
| minor releases? | ||
|
|
||
| ### More const |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you please elaborate these headers a little: "Replace more variables with const where appropriate"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On const: That's not really C++11, that's always been good practice. I wonder if it's even worth putting that in this PR. It's also not a huge win when we retroactively add const into existing code. Maybe we should focus on bigger wins instead. Usage of const is something that should be flagged during code reviews.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm adding a middle ground.
|
Updated lots. Much more actionable decisions proposed. Probably in a final version all the "Recommendation" should be changed to "Decision", right? |
|
New updates pushed. I think there's just one open issue now: Minor OOT breakage. Major version is supposed to allow such breakage, and it's not possible to avoid in order to:
|
|
I think these changes should all be done for an API version, if possible. If that's 3.9 or 3.10 matters less. But also possible to do one type (e.g. What's the timeline for releasing 3.9? |
Impossible to answer. At the least, we need the de-swigging done. Anyway, let's get this going. |
|
Merged manually. |
Coming out of: