Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8120477
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 6, 20262026-06-06T05:10:21+00:00 2026-06-06T05:10:21+00:00

My compiler expands it to 199711L. What does that mean? I read that __cplusplus

  • 0

My compiler expands it to 199711L. What does that mean? I read that __cplusplus > 199711L signifies C++11. What are the possible expansions of this macro and what does it signify?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-06T05:10:24+00:00Added an answer on June 6, 2026 at 5:10 am

    The 199711L stands for Year=1997, Month = 11 (i.e., November of 1997) — the date when the committee approved the standard that the rest of the ISO approved in early 1998.

    For the 2003 standard, there were few enough changes that the committee (apparently) decided to leave that value unchanged.

    For the 2011 standard, it’s required to be defined as 201103L, (again, year=2011, month = 03) again meaning that the committee approved the standard as finalized in March of 2011.

    For the 2014 standard, it’s required to be defined as 201402L, interpreted the same way as above (February 2014).

    For the 2017 standard, it’s required to be defined as 201703L (March 2017).

    For the 2020 standard, the value has been updated to 202002L (February 2020).

    For the 2023 standard, the value has been updated to 202302L (February 2023).

    Before the original standard was approved, quite a few compilers normally defined it to 0 (or just an empty definition like #define __cplusplus) to signify "not-conforming". When asked for their strictest conformance, many defined it to 1.

    I almost forgot to mention, but one more tidbit about ancient compilers: a few of the earliest versions of cfront (and probably a few others copying it) defined c_plusplus instead of __cplusplus. I don’t recall it’s being defined to any meaningful value though.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

This question expands upon the one at abstract-class-numberformat-very-confused-about-getinstance . I feel that this question
The compiler complains about this, after I activated all kind of warnings: For MyApp_Prefix.pch
The compiler complains about this code: HashMap<String,int> userName2ind = new HashMap<String,int>(); for (int i=0;
g++ compiler gives this error: expected `;' before 'it' template <typename T> class myList
Heads up: This is a weird question. I've got some really useful macros that
So I've got a macro that works nicely in GCC, but not in Microsoft's
So I have this huge tree that is basically a big switch/case with string
How does the TEXT(x) macro expand to Lx if unicode is defined and x
This lambda does not compile, but I do not understand why. using System; using
I'm attempting to compile a file that instantiates this class. GCC gives me cryptic

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.