On Wednesday July 18 2012, joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: > I think it would be feasible to do a binary-only break somewhere around the > 5.2 timeframe (say, ~12 months) where we address this. Technically, this > would be Qt 6, but user porting effort would be reduced to a recompile. The > value of having a long lived (5 years?) binary compatible 5.x series is > (IMO) low as there are quite often other reasons to recompile the stack.
We don't even need to break binary compatibility. We could use inline namespaces to let new code see the new containers while old code uses the old ones. That will exclude non-C++11 compilers from seeing the more efficient implementations, or else from the BC guarantee. Do we care? Thanks, Marc -- Marc Mutz <marc.m...@kdab.com> | Senior 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 _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
