On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 06:51:44PM +0100, Philippe wrote: > >So, as much as I'd like for some of the things I'mworking on to be > >able to benefit from C++ 20, I'd also say that we should rather slow > >down, and only require C++20 if we have something to show for it. > > C++20 makes for a more enjoyable coding experience; this human factor > should not be ruled out of the equation. > > With the key to sometimes more readable code and a certain gain in > productivity.
This is an argument in favour of making it possible to /use/ Qt in a C++20-using environment or application. This is already possible right now. Nobody stops anyone from using C++20 in their own code of a Qt-based application and enjoy all the coding experience found that way, But that's only loosely related to the suggestion in the original message in this thread which was asking to make C++20 mandatory to use for all Qt users, which has the potential to leave behind people and projects who cannot simply use a C++20, be it that there is no such thing as a C++20-capable compiler in the environment they (have to) live in, or that they are simply lacking the resources to adapt their enviroment, or that they have other restrictions in their overall setup that prevent arbitrary changes to their environment. Qt benefits from a very broad range of users. For me it seems counter-productive to leave people behind needlessly. Insofar I agree with the previously voiced sentiments that convincing arguments to _force_ people into a C++20 environment (or drop the use of Qt) have not been presented yet. This is not saying such argument cannot exist, it's just not clear - at least to me - what they may be. So if you - who is apparently a happy user of C++20 - have examples what C++20 features make the coding experience better to a degree to compensate for the potential loss on the other side, I am all eears. Andre' -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
