Difference between GCC binary literals and C++14 ones?

妖精的绣舞 提交于 2019-11-29 05:36:19

From the commit diff which introduced support in gcc 4.9, the only difference is that gcc now accepts binary literals as a language feature of C++1y, and doesn't warn that they're a gcc extension if C++1y support is specified. There is no change to the actual implementation.

Previously:

warning : binary constants are a GCC extension

Now, unless -std=c++1y is specified:

warning : binary constants are a C..1y feature or GCC extension

I'm guessing that the difference is since one is an extension, then people wouldn't be too inclined to use it while the other is standard compliant and accessible without turning on extensions. It's a formality.

The first document you point to is the GNU implementation of binary literals as an extension to the C language (ie, it is a non-standard feature of C and that document defines how gcc implements an extension to the language).

The second document you point to is a proposal to add binary literals to the C++11 language, but as far as I know it has not been accepted either (*) and that means it's not part of standard C++ either, it remains as a language extension provided by gcc.

As far as I can see this feature would be non-portable across compilers, but you could define your own binary literal implementation in C++11 by using user defined literals.

(*) s/not accepted/I can't find any reference to binary literals in N3485 "Working Draft, Standard for Programming Language C++", but it might be a feature accepted for the next standard of C++.

易学教程内所有资源均来自网络或用户发布的内容,如有违反法律规定的内容欢迎反馈
该文章没有解决你所遇到的问题?点击提问,说说你的问题,让更多的人一起探讨吧!