On Tuesday 30 June 2015 18:16:34 Olivier Goffart wrote: > On Friday 26. June 2015 08:41:11 Thiago Macieira wrote: > > On Friday 26 June 2015 11:59:11 Olivier Goffart wrote: > > > However, it is questionable if even this works. We already rely on the > > > standard library ABI in QException. And most users will have to > > > recompile > > > everything if they want to change standard library anyway. > > > > std::exception is compatible between libc++ and libstdc++, so that doesn't > > count. > > Ok. (But by luck... another version might not)
s/luck/design/ > Anyway, you did not answer the actual question. Are you against changing the > policy or not? I am, for several reasons. For the container types, please use the Qt ones, for API consistency and familiarity. I don't want to see API using std::vector, period. Since we're talking about *ABI*, it stands to reason we're talking about mandatory features, so outside of any #ifdefs that may change between Qt's build and the user application's. That means any such feature depending on a C++11 library feature should be protected by a configure-time check and a #define in qconfig.h. Given our horrible configure script and configure.exe source code, writing such checks are difficult and time-consuming. More likely than not, we'll get it wrong. And finally, I am against it because libc++ and libstdc++ co-existence is still a goal, even on OS X. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development