Hello, On Saturday 29 June 2013 18:51:38 Ivan Čukić wrote: > > > I don't agree that these /additional/ features are about the api. > > > <algorithm> is an (IMO) immensely useful, especially with lambdas and > > > std::bind for actual non exposed parts. > > > > Well, yes that's all useful. That's the type of things I'd like to use > > everywhere too. I badly worded that above though. What I meant is that for > > the internals of a library you can spare their use in most cases (just to > > Ok, that is fine then. > > > avoid blowing the complexity of your lib internals), still you probably > > want to provide extra API for C++11 users (and then limit your use there, > > also important from a BC standpoint). Now of course that's the library > > +1 ABI should be the same in both versions (unlike gcc's std::list iirc)
Just wondering, was this email as "OK, I see where you come from", or was it a "OK, let's deal with the C++11 dependency in plasma-framework the same way than the rest of KDE Frameworks as lamely described"? Matters to me because that means either we're on the same page now and I encode my previous email at the right place on the wiki (it's evidently lacking at that point), or I need to actively seek with you a compromise around plasma-framework. Cheers. -- Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net KDAB - proud supporter of KDE, http://www.kdab.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
