> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Markus Goetz > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 11:45 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Development] SJLJ vs DW2 (Was: Re: Qt 5.2.0 - Beta Release > Testing) > > Hi Kai, > > On 25.10.13 10:05, Koehne Kai wrote: > > I think the link is outdated. MinGW-builds nowadays supported both dw2 > and sjlj exception handling for 32 bit since ages, see e.g. > > > > http://mingw-w64.sourceforge.net/download.php#mingw-builds > > > > (Note that the Mingw-w64 and MinGW-builds projects joined forces just > recently, so the mingw-builds binaries are the 'officially endorsed' ones). > > > > Anyhow, Qt itself doesn't really care about SJLJ vs dw2: It compiles just > > fine > with both versions. It's just that, since 5.1, we're building the 'official' > packages with a dw2 toolchain. > > > Are there any plans to also provide official SJLJ packages for mingw-w64 ?
No, there aren't any plans AFAIK. If we'll add a new configuration it'll most likely be a 64 bit one, and we really can't stretch the number of Windows binary packages much further. > Right now people that don't want to build themselves have to go 3rd > party sites like > http://sourceforge.net/projects/qtx64/files/qt-x64/5.2.1/mingw-4.8/ I don't know about this project. However, the mingw-builds folks are also providing Qt packages, which I can only recommend: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingwbuilds/files/external-binary-packages I'm all for featuring these a bit more prominently within Qt ... > (Yes, SJLJ is inferior to SEH, but sometimes you don't control the whole > stack/hell of DLLs and just need to use SJLJ) Understood. We just made the choice for DW2 because SJLJ was a lot slower, even for people who don't use exceptions. Regards Kai _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
