Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

L120: Transition to Modern C++ #460

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

L120: Transition to Modern C++ #460

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
19a5434
Added L120-requiring-cpp17.md
veblush Oct 14, 2024
b1d0d06
Added the link to the group
veblush Oct 14, 2024
d46d244
Updated
veblush Oct 14, 2024
b9ae18c
Added a new sentence
veblush Oct 14, 2024
28c6aa5
Updated the doc
veblush Nov 12, 2024
55ba848
Rename
veblush Nov 12, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
29 changes: 29 additions & 0 deletions L120-requiring-cpp17.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
L120: Requiring C++17 in gRPC Core/C++ Library
----
* Author(s): veblush
* Approver: markdroth
* Status: Draft
* Implemented in: n/a
* Last updated: Oct 14, 2024
* Discussion at: TBD

## Abstract

gRPC starts requiring C++17.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we want to have to keep publishing new gRFCs every time we add support for a new version of C++, or do we just want to publish a gRFC that says "from now on, we'll follow the OSS foundational C++ support policy"?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's a good point. Our plan is to keep up with the OSS foundational C++ support policy so we can have this last gRFC making it clear and skip new gRFC for the next bump.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I mentioned the future plan at the bottom. PTAL.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If this is actually our plan going forward, then I think we should re-title this gRFC -- it's less about C++17 specifically than it is about the fact that we're now going to follow the OSS foundational C++ support guidelines.

Maybe this warrants a brief discussion at our Tuesday design review meeting?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's a good point. I changed it and I'll bring this up in the next design meeting.


## Background

To leverage the advancements in C++ standards, gRPC has progressively updated its requirements.
Initially, it adopted C++11 in 2017 (as per [Allow C++ in gRPC Core Library](L6-core-allow-cpp.md)).
veblush marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
Then, in 2022, it transitioned to C++14 (as per [L98: Requiring C++14 in gRPC Core/C++ Library](L98-requiring-cpp14.md)).

Now, to align with the [the OSS Foundational C++ support policy](https://opensource.google/documentation/policies/cplusplus-support)
and stay consistent with its major dependencies (Abseil, BoringSSL, and Protobuf), gRPC is transitioning to require C++17.

## Proposal

gRPC 1.69 will be the final release compatible with C++14. Going forward, gRPC will require C++17. This change will take effect with gRPC 1.70.

gRPC 1.69 will continue to receive critical bug fixes (P0) and security updates for one year (until December 10, 2025).

This update does not introduce API changes, so the major version of gRPC remains unchanged.