Hi, Am Dienstag, den 30.03.2010, 20:37 +0200 schrieb Fabien Parent:
> For the work to keep two code, i don't think it will increase a lot > the maintenance. OK, I will repeat myself: I don't see any glaring need to modify our API to use C++0x features. Most of the C++0x features will work just fine on top of an API that is C++ 98 compatible. There may be a few places here and there where an additional piece of glue for C++0x may make sense, but the bulk of the API is not going to be affected. > > There is a standard way to do that once the standard is out, which is to > > check the numeric value of the __cplusplus macro. > > In fact, gcc doesn't define the value of the macro, so it get the > default value of 1. > If gcc was following the standard it would be possible to write this: > > #if __cplusplus > 199711L > // c++0x > #else > // c++98 > #endif > > But it's not. I hope others compilers follow the standard more closer. Dude, the standard has not even been released yet! :-) I think this is all much ado about nothing. Adopting C++0x goodies is not going to require a redesign of gtkmm. The changes I have in mind as proposals for gtkmm 3 go much further than anything C++0x might do to our API. :-) --Daniel _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
