Guillaume Munch wrote: > More specific answers follow. > > Le 26/08/2015 13:18, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : >> Le 24/08/2015 21:19, Georg Baum a écrit : > > Thanks. By the way, Georg, is there any plan to backport 125a2977 and > 27f067dd?
IMHO we should not backport much at this phase of the 2.2 development cycle anymore, but try to finalize 2.2.0. Proper backporting would involve intensive testing, and this time is IMHO better spent by making the 2.2.0 release happen. In addition, 27f067dd changes the behaviour of a frequently used lfun. I think we should not do that in the stable series. >> I do not know that much about auto_ptr and unique_ptr, but would it be >> possible to use auto_ptr as a poor man's unique_ptr? If yes, is it >> dangerous? This is possible in some use cases. IMHO having a lyx::unique_ptr which is either std::unique_ptr or std::auto_ptr is indeed dangerous, since they behave differently in some cases. >> Discussing whether we want to turn c++11 on automatically on platforms >> that support it. >> >> One problem that we have is that the compiler has to be in c++11 mode >> _and_ the configure script has to be aware of it. Currently weird >> compilers are not handled at all. We can at least turn c++11 on automatically for "non-weird" compilers (and I think we should do it). Georg
