> Le 6 déc. 2018 à 08:25, zyx <z...@gmx.us> a écrit : > > I'd remove the std::auto_ptr usage from the public > API completely, and use, if needed, either of them based on the > compiler being used (and what it offers) only in internal code. That > would support both old and new C++ standards.
It wouldn't work. There is no point in having an option to compile internal code with (auto|unique)_ptr when interfaces would use unique_ptr. Because unique_ptr support would then be required for internal code anyway, so why would it need to insist on using auto_ptr in some places? :) The readme.html is probably wildly outdated: > Installation with CMake > > PoDoFo has support for builds using CMake on all supported platforms. The > CMake build has been tested on: > > • Visual C++ 9 Express Edition [Win32] ("Visual Studio 9 2008" target) > • Visual C++ 8 Express Edition [Win32] ("Visual Studio 8 2005" target) > (needs additional setup) > • Visual C++ 8 Express +NMake [Win32] ("NMake Makefiles" target) (needs > additional setup) > • MinGW with GCC 3.4.2 [Win32] ("MinGW Makefiles" target) > • gcc 3.3.5 [Linux: Debian 3.1] ("Unix Makefiles" target) > • gcc 4.0, 4.1, 4.2 [Linux: Debian 4.0] ("Unix Makefiles" target) > • gcc 4.0 [Mac OS X 10.4.10] ("Unix Makefiles" target) For Windows for instance, I don't even know, except maybe on an old dusty CD out from the attic, where anybody might find a Visual C++ 9 (or 8!) and an OS in good order to run it, build PoDoFo, and develop, build, test, deploy any valuable application using it, with these outdated tools. On the computer-era timeline, I'm a rather old man, born in the early 60', but believe me or not, I have no nostalgia of the compiler tools we used by the end of the 20th century. Not even those used more than a decade ago. I'm NOT advocating to use cutting-edge C++ new goodies. Just to think about deciding, setting in stone, that for now and some yet undefined future, PoDoFo is based on C+11, a stable reasonable, old-enough, standard basis. So that any line of code inside PoDoFo (and that includes its 'public' interfaces) could make use of any language feature supported by C++11, when really appropriate to. Switching from auto_ptr to unique_ptr would be more than enough as a valuable first step in that direction. :) -- Best Regards, Meilleures salutations, Met vriendelijke groeten, Olivier Mascia _______________________________________________ Podofo-users mailing list Podofo-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/podofo-users