> Le 6 déc. 2018 à 08:25, zyx <z...@gmx.us> a écrit :
>
> I'd remove the std::auto_ptr usage from the public
> API completely, and use, if needed, either of them based on the
> compiler being used (and what it offers) only in internal code. That
> would support both old and new C++ standards.
It wouldn't work. There is no point in having an option to compile internal
code with (auto|unique)_ptr when interfaces would use unique_ptr. Because
unique_ptr support would then be required for internal code anyway, so why
would it need to insist on using auto_ptr in some places? :)
The readme.html is probably wildly outdated:
> Installation with CMake
>
> PoDoFo has support for builds using CMake on all supported platforms. The
> CMake build has been tested on:
>
> • Visual C++ 9 Express Edition [Win32] ("Visual Studio 9 2008" target)
> • Visual C++ 8 Express Edition [Win32] ("Visual Studio 8 2005" target)
> (needs additional setup)
> • Visual C++ 8 Express +NMake [Win32] ("NMake Makefiles" target) (needs
> additional setup)
> • MinGW with GCC 3.4.2 [Win32] ("MinGW Makefiles" target)
> • gcc 3.3.5 [Linux: Debian 3.1] ("Unix Makefiles" target)
> • gcc 4.0, 4.1, 4.2 [Linux: Debian 4.0] ("Unix Makefiles" target)
> • gcc 4.0 [Mac OS X 10.4.10] ("Unix Makefiles" target)
For Windows for instance, I don't even know, except maybe on an old dusty CD
out from the attic, where anybody might find a Visual C++ 9 (or 8!) and an OS
in good order to run it, build PoDoFo, and develop, build, test, deploy any
valuable application using it, with these outdated tools. On the computer-era
timeline, I'm a rather old man, born in the early 60', but believe me or not, I
have no nostalgia of the compiler tools we used by the end of the 20th century.
Not even those used more than a decade ago.
I'm NOT advocating to use cutting-edge C++ new goodies. Just to think about
deciding, setting in stone, that for now and some yet undefined future, PoDoFo
is based on C+11, a stable reasonable, old-enough, standard basis. So that any
line of code inside PoDoFo (and that includes its 'public' interfaces) could
make use of any language feature supported by C++11, when really appropriate to.
Switching from auto_ptr to unique_ptr would be more than enough as a valuable
first step in that direction.
:)
--
Best Regards, Meilleures salutations, Met vriendelijke groeten,
Olivier Mascia
_______________________________________________
Podofo-users mailing list
Podofo-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/podofo-users
