Not that my opinion matters very much because I haven't contributed any code to the core of gtkmm, but I agree with Chris on his point here. I think that gtkmm should move to c++0x fully when it comes out and should drop the c++98 support. It will get very confusing to have things start to mix otherwise.
Jim On Mar 30, 2010, at 1:36 PM, Christopher Harvey wrote: > The way I understand it, when c++0x comes application developers will want to > use it. If gtkmm doesn't support the new standard then there will be an odd > mix of shared_ptrs and auto's for example. Is c++0x even backward compatible > with 98? I'm not a gtkmm developer but it sounds like Fabien's idea below > would mean writing and maintaining 2 version of gtkmm in the same file. I > guess what I'm asking is how big a deal is it if gtkmm dropped c++98 support > when c++0x comes out? Could we do it at gtkmm 3.0? Do the times line fit? > > Fabien Parent wrote: >> Hi, >> It would be great to see gtkmm start using some c++0x features. I >> think the best would be to keep compatibility with c++ 98 like boost >> did. >> >> We can find if the user is using c++98 or c++0x by looking if the >> macro __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__ has been defined by the gcc's >> preprocessor. >> >> For example: >> #if defined(__GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__) >> // c++0x >> #else >> // c++98 >> #endif >> >> Fabien Parent >> >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 16:58, Murray Cumming <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 2010-03-30 at 16:48 +0200, Daniel Elstner wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Am Dienstag, den 30.03.2010, 16:19 +0200 schrieb Murray Cumming: >>>> >>>> >>>>> It would be nice if someone played with using these new features in >>>>> gtkmm. For intsance, create a git branch and try to replace use of >>>>> Glib::RefPtr<Thing> with auto wherever possible. >>>>> >>>> Well, that would mainly be relevant for code using the gtkmm API. I.e. >>>> our examples and stuff. >>>> >>> Yes, we have lots of code in gtkmm-documentation/examples (make check, >>> to build it) that should be branched to try stuff. >>> >>> >>>> For the time being I see no compelling reason to break compatibility >>>> with C++ 98 in the library code itself. However, I'm going to adopt >>>> C++0x in my application code as soon as it can reasonably be done. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> [email protected] >>> www.murrayc.com >>> www.openismus.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> gtkmm-list mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> gtkmm-list mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list >> > > _______________________________________________ > gtkmm-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
