<div dir="ltr">Brilliant! It looks as if ITK has already done a lot of this!<div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Andrew</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Matt McCormick <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:matt.mccormick@kitware.com" target="_blank">matt.mccormick@kitware.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">VTK_OVERRIDE would be nice, and it would be nice to macros that are<br>
similar to ITK. Currently there is<br>
<br>
ITK_OVERRIDE<br>
ITK_NOEXCEPT<br>
ITK_NULLPTR<br>
<br>
<a href="http://itk.org/gitweb?p=ITK.git;a=blob;f=Modules/Core/Common/include/itkMacro.h;h=aa4d40d7f5042eaf3c696af469d4cf0848239935;hb=HEAD#l121" target="_blank">http://itk.org/gitweb?p=ITK.git;a=blob;f=Modules/Core/Common/include/itkMacro.h;h=aa4d40d7f5042eaf3c696af469d4cf0848239935;hb=HEAD#l121</a><br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Matt<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Marcus D. Hanwell<br>
<<a href="mailto:marcus.hanwell@kitware.com">marcus.hanwell@kitware.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I am with David Gobbi and Ken. It would be a simple search and replace<br>
> once support for pre-C++11 compilers were dropped and the potential<br>
> for unintended consequences is too great. Glad to see there is general<br>
> support, I should have included more on my reasoning, but didn't want<br>
> to go into too much detail on implementation if there was little<br>
> support for it.<br>
><br>
> It sounds like there is, nullptr is definitely another piece of low<br>
> hanging fruit. There is lots more that would be great to use, the<br>
> language is evolving and it is important that we take advantage of the<br>
> parts that make sense.<br>
><br>
> Marcus<br>
><br>
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:43 PM, David Gobbi <<a href="mailto:david.gobbi@gmail.com">david.gobbi@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> Yes, I also believe that using "#define override" has the potential to<br>
>> cause problems. Let's say that "override" appears as a variable<br>
>> somewhere in code that someone brought into VTK and tested with a<br>
>> C++11 compiler (this is legal, since "override" is not a keyword).<br>
>> Then someone else tries compiling that code on C++03 where the<br>
>> "#define override" is active. All of a sudden, "override" is replaced<br>
>> by nothing anywhere it is used as a variable (or as any other kind of<br>
>> identifier).<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Andrew Maclean<br>
>> <<a href="mailto:andrew.amaclean@gmail.com">andrew.amaclean@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>> Hi Ken<br>
>>><br>
>>> Good point, thanks for that.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Andrew<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 8:25 AM, Moreland, Kenneth <<a href="mailto:kmorel@sandia.gov">kmorel@sandia.gov</a>><br>
>>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> +1 for me too.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> However, my vote is actually to introduce things like VTK_OVERRIDE and<br>
>>>> VTK_FINAL until pre-C++11 compilers get abandoned. I find it disconcerting<br>
>>>> when libraries try to get cute with changing the behavior of (or trying to<br>
>>>> emulate) keywords with preprocessor macros. It can be pretty confusing when<br>
>>>> something goes wrong, and good luck if you have to use two separate projects<br>
>>>> together that both tried to define preprocessor macros with different<br>
>>>> implementations.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> -Ken<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> From: Andrew Maclean <<a href="mailto:andrew.amaclean@gmail.com">andrew.amaclean@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>>> Reply-To: "<a href="mailto:andrew.amaclean@gmail.com">andrew.amaclean@gmail.com</a>" <<a href="mailto:andrew.amaclean@gmail.com">andrew.amaclean@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>>> Date: Monday, August 18, 2014 4:09 PM<br>
>>>> To: VTK Developers <<a href="mailto:vtk-developers@vtk.org">vtk-developers@vtk.org</a>>, "Marcus D. Hanwell"<br>
>>>> <<a href="mailto:marcus.hanwell@kitware.com">marcus.hanwell@kitware.com</a>>, Ben Boeckel <<a href="mailto:ben.boeckel@kitware.com">ben.boeckel@kitware.com</a>>, Sean<br>
>>>> McBride <<a href="mailto:sean@rogue-research.com">sean@rogue-research.com</a>><br>
>>>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [vtk-developers] Introducing (optional) C++11<br>
>>>> features in VTK<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> +1! ... actually: ++1 :-)<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I would support this. To keep VTK relevant we need to be introducing these<br>
>>>> features. Especially features like nullptr, unique_ptr etc.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> But I would not be happy at introducing more VTK defines like VTK_OVERRIDE<br>
>>>> and VTK_FINAL - unless absolutely necessary. I much prefer Sean's idea of<br>
>>>> using a modernise tool.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Regards<br>
>>>> Andrew<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:05 AM, <<a href="mailto:vtk-developers-request@vtk.org">vtk-developers-request@vtk.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
>>>>> From: "Marcus D. Hanwell" <<a href="mailto:marcus.hanwell@kitware.com">marcus.hanwell@kitware.com</a>><br>
>>>>> To: VTK Developers <<a href="mailto:vtk-developers@vtk.org">vtk-developers@vtk.org</a>><br>
>>>>> Cc:<br>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 13:45:37 -0400<br>
>>>>> Subject: [vtk-developers] Introducing (optional) C++11 features in VTK<br>
>>>>> Hi,<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> As we move forward, it would be great to get a feeling for people's<br>
>>>>> thoughts about integrating some components of C++11 optionally. So if<br>
>>>>> C++11 is available/enabled, there are several features we could enable<br>
>>>>> optionally at compile time.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> A very simple example is that of the new override keyword, that is<br>
>>>>> used to indicate that a member function is overriding a virtual<br>
>>>>> function. Using this can avoid mistakes where the signature changes<br>
>>>>> and derived classes are missed. It can be defined in a header (empty<br>
>>>>> on old compilers, override with recent compilers). Final is similar,<br>
>>>>> indicating that the virtual function cannot be overridden in derived<br>
>>>>> classes.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> This would introduce changes to the VTK coding style, where we now use<br>
>>>>> virtual for all virtual functions (first declaration, or subsequent<br>
>>>>> overrides). We could introduce this gradually for new code, even<br>
>>>>> having one or two dashboards compiling this way would help spot simple<br>
>>>>> errors such as an incorrect signature not actually overriding a<br>
>>>>> function, but in fact declaring a new virtual for example.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> In these cases I would suggest simple naming, so VTK_OVERRIDE and<br>
>>>>> VTK_FINAL would be used where a C++11 only code would simply use the<br>
>>>>> new keywords.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Thoughts, objections? There are lots of other features, and I know it<br>
>>>>> will be a while before we can use them all but it would be great to<br>
>>>>> make a start with some of the easier ones that can improve code<br>
>>>>> quality with little overhead.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Marcus<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
>>>>> From: Ben Boeckel <<a href="mailto:ben.boeckel@kitware.com">ben.boeckel@kitware.com</a>><br>
>>>>> To: "Marcus D. Hanwell" <<a href="mailto:marcus.hanwell@kitware.com">marcus.hanwell@kitware.com</a>><br>
>>>>> Cc: VTK Developers <<a href="mailto:vtk-developers@vtk.org">vtk-developers@vtk.org</a>><br>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 14:21:56 -0400<br>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [vtk-developers] Introducing (optional) C++11 features in<br>
>>>>> VTK<br>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 13:45:37 -0400, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:<br>
>>>>> > Thoughts, objections? There are lots of other features, and I know it<br>
>>>>> > will be a while before we can use them all but it would be great to<br>
>>>>> > make a start with some of the easier ones that can improve code<br>
>>>>> > quality with little overhead.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> What about "= delete" for removing default assignment and copy<br>
>>>>> constructors?<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> --Ben<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
>>>>> From: "Marcus D. Hanwell" <<a href="mailto:marcus.hanwell@kitware.com">marcus.hanwell@kitware.com</a>><br>
>>>>> To: Ben Boeckel <<a href="mailto:ben.boeckel@kitware.com">ben.boeckel@kitware.com</a>><br>
>>>>> Cc: VTK Developers <<a href="mailto:vtk-developers@vtk.org">vtk-developers@vtk.org</a>><br>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 14:29:10 -0400<br>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [vtk-developers] Introducing (optional) C++11 features in<br>
>>>>> VTK<br>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Ben Boeckel <<a href="mailto:ben.boeckel@kitware.com">ben.boeckel@kitware.com</a>><br>
>>>>> wrote:<br>
>>>>> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 13:45:37 -0400, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:<br>
>>>>> >> Thoughts, objections? There are lots of other features, and I know it<br>
>>>>> >> will be a while before we can use them all but it would be great to<br>
>>>>> >> make a start with some of the easier ones that can improve code<br>
>>>>> >> quality with little overhead.<br>
>>>>> ><br>
>>>>> > What about "= delete" for removing default assignment and copy<br>
>>>>> > constructors?<br>
>>>>> ><br>
>>>>> Certainly, I think we should start out simple and then build it out.<br>
>>>>> If we have prototypes for a few of the most useful features that can<br>
>>>>> easily be encapsulated in compile time logic that will degrade to<br>
>>>>> C++98 that would be great.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Marcus<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
>>>>> From: "Sean McBride" <<a href="mailto:sean@rogue-research.com">sean@rogue-research.com</a>><br>
>>>>> To: "Marcus D. Hanwell" <<a href="mailto:marcus.hanwell@kitware.com">marcus.hanwell@kitware.com</a>>, "VTK Developers"<br>
>>>>> <<a href="mailto:vtk-developers@vtk.org">vtk-developers@vtk.org</a>><br>
>>>>> Cc:<br>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:50:12 -0400<br>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [vtk-developers] Introducing (optional) C++11 features in<br>
>>>>> VTK<br>
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 13:45:37 -0400, Marcus D. Hanwell said:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> >As we move forward, it would be great to get a feeling for people's<br>
>>>>> >thoughts about integrating some components of C++11 optionally. So if<br>
>>>>> >C++11 is available/enabled, there are several features we could enable<br>
>>>>> >optionally at compile time.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> +1 from me.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> nullptr is another one that can be made to work even on older compilers<br>
>>>>> with some #define glue.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Instead of creating a 'VTK_OVERRIDE', we could also use 'override' as if<br>
>>>>> we required C++11 and "#define override /* nothing */" as appropriate. Then<br>
>>>>> when C++11 really is the minimun requirement no big find/replace is<br>
>>>>> required. Just a thought.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> PS: I already have dashboards building as C++11 and C++14.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Cheers,<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> --<br>
>>>>> ____________________________________________________________<br>
>>>>> Sean McBride, B. Eng <a href="mailto:sean@rogue-research.com">sean@rogue-research.com</a><br>
>>>>> Rogue Research <a href="http://www.rogue-research.com" target="_blank">www.rogue-research.com</a><br>
>>>>> Mac Software Developer Montréal, Québec, Canada<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
>>>>> From: "Sean McBride" <<a href="mailto:sean@rogue-research.com">sean@rogue-research.com</a>><br>
>>>>> To: "Marcus D. Hanwell" <<a href="mailto:marcus.hanwell@kitware.com">marcus.hanwell@kitware.com</a>>, "VTK Developers"<br>
>>>>> <<a href="mailto:vtk-developers@vtk.org">vtk-developers@vtk.org</a>><br>
>>>>> Cc:<br>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:05:38 -0400<br>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [vtk-developers] Introducing (optional) C++11 features in<br>
>>>>> VTK<br>
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:50:12 -0400, Sean McBride said:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> >nullptr is another one that can be made to work even on older compilers<br>
>>>>> >with some #define glue.<br>
>>>>> ><br>
>>>>> >Instead of creating a 'VTK_OVERRIDE', we could also use 'override' as if<br>
>>>>> >we required C++11 and "#define override /* nothing */" as appropriate.<br>
>>>>> >Then when C++11 really is the minimun requirement no big find/replace is<br>
>>>>> >required. Just a thought.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> I hit send too fast...<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> I also wanted to suggest looking at the clang-modernize tool, which is "a<br>
>>>>> standalone tool used to automatically convert C++ code written against old<br>
>>>>> standards to use features of the newest C++ standard".<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> <<a href="http://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-modernize.html" target="_blank">http://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-modernize.html</a>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Specifically, it can be used to automatically add 'override' and convert<br>
>>>>> to 'nullptr':<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> <<a href="http://clang.llvm.org/extra/AddOverrideTransform.html" target="_blank">http://clang.llvm.org/extra/AddOverrideTransform.html</a>><br>
>>>>> <<a href="http://clang.llvm.org/extra/UseNullptrTransform.html" target="_blank">http://clang.llvm.org/extra/UseNullptrTransform.html</a>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Cheers,<br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Powered by <a href="http://www.kitware.com" target="_blank">www.kitware.com</a><br>
>><br>
>> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at <a href="http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html" target="_blank">http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html</a><br>
>><br>
>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:<br>
>> <a href="http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers" target="_blank">http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers</a><br>
>><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Powered by <a href="http://www.kitware.com" target="_blank">www.kitware.com</a><br>
><br>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at <a href="http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html" target="_blank">http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html</a><br>
><br>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:<br>
> <a href="http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers" target="_blank">http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers</a><br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>___________________________________________<br>Andrew J. P. Maclean<br><br>___________________________________________
</div>