

A comparison of C++11 language support in VS2012, g++ 4.7 and Clang 3.1 - AndreyKarpov
http://www.cpprocks.com/a-comparison-of-c11-language-support-in-vs2012-g-4-7-and-clang-3-1/

======
danieldk
A detailed list that is regularly updated, with exact version numbers has been
around for years on the stdcxx Wiki:

<http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C++0xCompilerSupport>

~~~
snogglethorpe
Indeed, I suspect it's a reasonable bet that the guy (Korban) just used the
apache.org page and reformatted the contents with his target audience and
personal goals (which seems to be selling his book) in mind.

[Which is not a bad thing, mind you—the apache page is fairly accurate and up-
to-date (at least for the major compilers), so it's better people use that as
a reference than doing it themselves badly. It would have been nice if he'd
included a link though ...]

------
TwoBit
That site should clarify that they are talking about the open source Clang 3.1
and not Apple Clang 3.1. Apple is unfortunately using the same version
numbering as the open source clang yet their compiler is significantly less
featured. It's ironic that Apple started clang, yet their clang is the most
out of date.

------
nikic
This is missing the supports list for the Intel Compiler (which to my
knowledge has a pretty good C++11 coverage).

~~~
TwoBit
Isn't Intel using a modified EDG front-end? Or has Intel completely customized
EDG to the point that they are maintaining their own branch?

------
cpeterso
GNU tracks C++11 support in recent gcc versions here:

<http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html>

------
nuje
There are still a few features that C++ lacks. If it only added a s-expression
syntax and macros, and built-in logic programming support, it would be
perfect!

------
mparlane
This is desperately missing color coded cells :(

So is the linked wiki at apache.org.

