GCC 7 Getting Closer To Release, But Running Behind On Regressions

[ldo17]

It's 2017 and it still doesn't have Windows x64 support. It's getting hilarious. Software racism at its finest.

I’m sure it will support Win64 just as soon as Microsoft brings that out...

[Brane215]

GCC, like many other open-source projects as of the past few years, have decided that their major version number should not be so important anymore. GCC 6 seems to be a very forgettable major version in general. Some distros plan to skip it.

I like it. I'm using 6.3 on Gentoo and am currently finishing Cross Linux From Scratch custom build with it.

[carewolf]

A lot of bugs are C++11 related. skipping GCC-6 wont matter if upstream dont fix their code.

Compiling with std=c++99 -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks might work though. The latter option is still needed to compile Chromium 55, they just can't be bothered to not write undefined behavior.

[pal666]

GCC 6 is not even stable yet on Gentoo. https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=582084

you misinterpreted this bug. it is gentoo not even stable on gcc 6, gcc 6 itself is fine

[pal666]

Compiling with std=c++99

there is no such version of c++

[pal666]

GCC 6 seems to be a very forgettable major version in general. Some distros plan to skip it.

new release of gcc brings host of improvements, as always. who cares what some pathetic losers will do? real distros can't plan anything, they have gcc 6 already.

[cj.wijtmans]

you misinterpreted this bug. it is gentoo not even stable on gcc 6, gcc 6 itself is fine

you misinterpreted what i said
The package is not marked stable.

[cj.wijtmans]

Compiling with std=c++99 -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks might work though. The latter option is still needed to compile Chromium 55, they just can't be bothered to not write undefined behavior.

This breaks ABI and means you have build many packages with std=x. Better to stay on GCC5.

[carewolf]

there is no such version of c++

That is true. But parsing the typo shouldn't be that hard.

[carewolf]

This breaks ABI and means you have build many packages with std=x. Better to stay on GCC5.

No it doesn't. The ABI change was in libstdc++ not in gcc, and libstdc++ can do both ABIs and will also use the new definition in code compiled with --std=c++98. There is another flag for switching std::string definition.