I totally and vehemently agree with Hermes here: We should NOT ditch VS2010.
Arguments that were raised by others against VS2010 and my reply: -"ditching it brings in new developers to ros magically" <- I do ask then, where are they? I don't see any. -"we should not be limited to strict C89" <- No one did request for that. All we want is to remain compatible to VS2010. A subset. -"syncing BTRFS is a bit harder" <- So what? Then let others do the job. Actually BTRFS is not even a mandatory feature of ros. Having it in the tree is just luxury. -"libc++" <- I see no urgent need and nothing it would give in return that would outweight what we would sacrifice. My arguments again for keeping VS2010: -VS2010 creates the smallest binaries of all compilers we do support -VS2010 CAN be installed in ros, when ros is installed as Server during 2nd stage, (yes this was not the case for a very short moment, unfortunately exactly when we discussed in https://github.com/reactos/reactos/pull/2658 but now it works again, even in 0.4.14-RC51) -VS2010 can now even open the VS2010 cmd prompt see https://jira.reactos.org/secure/attachment/57140/57140_0.4.15-dev-203-g711f631_fixed.webm -no other VS>2010 can even complete its setup in ros, and that will remain like that for many years to come -VS2010 is the last version that runs on XPSP3 (which is important for some of our devs including myself) -VS2010 is the last version that runs on 2k3SP2 which is our current target -VS2010 is reliable with industry-proven stability, and itself no moving target (unlike VS2019 which breaks our builds every few weeks when MS upgrades it) -VS2010 DOES provide std::unique_ptr. Stating anything else is just a lie. It covers > 95% of CPP2011-standard. It is absolutely possible and not complicated to write leak-free-code with it. _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Rosemail@example.com http://reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev