On Monday 10 October 2011, Olivier Goffart wrote:
> On Monday 10 October 2011 11:52:37 Mark wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Some time ago I've read something here about replacing Qt't QRegExp
> > backend with a existing library to get rid of the maintenance burden.
> 
> One other conclusion was not to touch QRegExp, meaning keeping
> compatibility. And those that need powerfull regexp can use the library
> and syntax they want. (Notice that in C++11, there is std::regex)

This sounds like a good plan to me.
For all my purposes Qt regexps were powerful and fast enough, and they were 
maybe not high-end, but definitely not trivial anymore.
IMO they are good enough as they are, especially keeping the (close to) 100% 
source compatiblity promise in mind.

Alex
_______________________________________________
Qt5-feedback mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback

Reply via email to