Re: cannot compile <future> with gcc 4.6

["James K. Lowden" <jklowden%schemamania.org@localhost>]

On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:33:11 -0400
Thor Lancelot Simon <tls%panix.com@localhost> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 12:37:13PM -0400, James K. Lowden wrote:
> > 
> > Someone may ask how all this becomes a "need".  If I want to work
> > with this project, it's going to be in C++ and sooner or later that
> > will mean C++11.  Some of it is threaded, and <future> is both
> > technically well thought out and, mostly, portable.  Except on
> > operating systems that don't support it.  :-(
> 
> So I'm trying to see through the buzzword blizzard here.  The gist of
> it is that "sooner or later" "C++ will mean C++11", that there is
> "tremendous work going on in [other projects] to support it", but
> NetBSD is an "ailing OS" because it doesn't have all the C++11
> features you want now?

Where I come from, "buzzword" is a pejorative term for marketing
phrases devoid of meaning.  I would be disappointed in myself if you
thought anything I wrote should be described that way.  

C++11 expands the standard C++ library.  There are two free
implementations, clang and GNU.  Neither can be fully implemented on
NetBSD.  In both cases -- locales and threads -- the missing features
were defined by POSIX many years ago.  For a C++ developer, NetBSD
isn't ailing; it's already obsolete.  

It need not remain so, and I'm prying open the hood to have a look.  If
we agree on the problem and a few of us work on it, I'm sure it can be
fixed.  After all, it's only software.  

--jkl