>> Are these cases something we can agree upon? > Too little, imho. If we continue at this speed (one week for 1.5 more use- > cases of an already-allowed feature), then we're going to be done with C++11 > when C++22 is out.
If I may ask, what is wrong with not using features of a language? I've always been a fan of Qt, not because of its conciseness, portability, versatility (although these help), but really because a C++ beginner, a seasoned C engineer unfamiliar with C++, and several other non-expert types can read and understand the Qt API, and also write basic applications. Preaching pragmatism, I'd happily vote for "what's convenient" inside the Qt implementation, but also vote against the C++11-ification of the API. Rolland ---------------------------------------------------------- Rolland Dudemaine tel direct:+33 143 143 702 Green Hills Software tel:+33 143 143 700 4 rue de la Pierre Levee mailto:[email protected] 75011 Paris fax: +33 143 143 707 France web: http://www.ghs.com ---------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
