On Monday, January 09, 2012 18:00:29 Gábor Lehel wrote: > 2012/1/9 Gábor Lehel <illiss...@gmail.com>: > > Perhaps we could use GCC's poison pragma[1] to make sure that no one > > uses them? In some cases it would just be replacing one error message > > with another (though perhaps a more user-friendly one), but in other > > cases it would substitute an error for no error. Of course, it only > > works with GCC. (TBF I haven't checked any other compilers.) > > > > [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cpp/Pragmas.html > > ...though that would also poison them for user code which I'm not sure > we want, so I suppose you would only want to turn it on when building > Qt itself.
I think this is a good idea. It doesn't matter that it only works with GCC. If any platform fails, the CI gate does not open for the patch. There's a few more instances of 'check' in Qt, after clearing those up, I could write a patch to add the pragma to qglobal which user code could enable if desired (just like QT_STRICT_ITERATORS or QT_NO_KEYWORDS for example). #ifdef QT_CHECK_MACRO_CONFLICTS #pragma GCC poison check <others...> #endif Any suggestions for an alternative name to QT_CHECK_MACRO_CONFLICTS ? Simply 'check' perhaps :) ? Thanks, -- Stephen Kelly <stephen.ke...@kdab.com> | Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-Independent Software Solutions
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
