Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2018-01-08 Thread Alex Blasche 
FYI 

As per https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/205305/ MSVC2013 is no longer in 
the CI. 

--
Alex
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-12-20 Thread Thiago Macieira 
On quarta-feira, 20 de dezembro de 2017 06:49:40 PST Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> Sounds good, +1, good riddance. 

+1

With the drop of QNX 6.6, we'll finally be C++11 core language feature-
complete, only ~7 years after it came out. Fortunately, those numbers seem to 
be coming down. We should be able to require C++14 within the next two years. 
We officially required C++98 with Qt 5.0 (15 years after it came out), but 
effectively we had been requiring that for some time, at least since we 
dropped faulty, old compilers.

(We dropped aCC 3 with PA-RISC sometime around 2008; HP aCC 6 was much better, 
but I don't remember if it supported template friends; I don't know when the 
Solaris compiler became "good", but I do remember building WebKit with it in 
the Summer of 2009; the drop of IRIX CC was before PA-RISC's, like the MSVC 
6.0 drop alongside non-Unicode Windows).
-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-12-20 Thread Ville Voutilainen 
On 20 December 2017 at 16:17, Lars Knoll  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> here are the promised numbers:
> *Version*
> *Compiler*
> *Commercial*
>
> *Version*
> *Compiler*
> *Opensource*
> 5.10.0
> MinGW530
> 22 %
>
> 5.10.0
> MinGW530
> 25 %
> 5.10.0
> MSVC2013_64
> 14 %
>
> 5.10.0
> MSVC2013_64
> 15 %
> 5.10.0
> MSVC2015
> 20 %
>
> 5.10.0
> MSVC2015
> 18 %
> 5.10.0
> MSVC2015_64
> 20 %
>
> 5.10.0
> MSVC2015_64
> 18 %
> 5.10.0
> MSVC2017_64
> 24 %
>
> 5.10.0
> MSVC2017_64
> 24 %
>
>
> So MSVC 2013 is now the least used compiler by both our customers and the
> community, and seems to be dropping fast. Given that 5.11 is still some
> months out, download percentages for this compiler would probably be in the
> single digit range by then.
>
> So my proposal is to drop MSVC 2013 support from 5.11 and onwards.
>
>
Sounds good, +1, good riddance. :)
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-12-20 Thread Lars Knoll 
Hi all,

here are the promised numbers:
Version

Compiler

Commercial

Version

Compiler

Opensource

5.10.0

MinGW530

22 %

5.10.0

MinGW530

25 %

5.10.0

MSVC2013_64

14 %

5.10.0

MSVC2013_64

15 %

5.10.0

MSVC2015

20 %

5.10.0

MSVC2015

18 %

5.10.0

MSVC2015_64

20 %

5.10.0

MSVC2015_64

18 %

5.10.0

MSVC2017_64

24 %

5.10.0

MSVC2017_64

24 %



So MSVC 2013 is now the least used compiler by both our customers and the 
community, and seems to be dropping fast. Given that 5.11 is still some months 
out, download percentages for this compiler would probably be in the single 
digit range by then.

So my proposal is to drop MSVC 2013 support from 5.11 and onwards.

Cheers,
Lars


On 18 Dec 2017, at 12:09, Tuukka Turunen 
mailto:tuukka.turu...@qt.io>> wrote:


Hi,

Akseli will check the percentages from Qt 5.10 online installer later this week.

Yours,

Tuukka

On 16/12/2017, 18.25, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" 
mailto:development-bounces+tuukka.turunen=qt...@qt-project.org>
 on behalf of thiago.macie...@intel.com> 
wrote:

   On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 10:57:32 PST Alex Blasche wrote:
Sorry, no. As mentioned during the contributor summit, this decision is
tabled until we have the 5.10 download figures.

   Any numbers now?

   --
   Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
 Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

   ___
   Development mailing list
   Development@qt-project.org
   http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development


___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-12-18 Thread Tuukka Turunen 

Hi,

Akseli will check the percentages from Qt 5.10 online installer later this 
week. 

Yours,

Tuukka

On 16/12/2017, 18.25, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" 
 wrote:

On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 10:57:32 PST Alex Blasche wrote:
> Sorry, no. As mentioned during the contributor summit, this decision is
> tabled until we have the 5.10 download figures.

Any numbers now?

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development


___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-12-16 Thread Thiago Macieira 
On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 10:57:32 PST Alex Blasche wrote:
> Sorry, no. As mentioned during the contributor summit, this decision is
> tabled until we have the 5.10 download figures.

Any numbers now?

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-11-08 Thread Jedrzej Nowacki 
Hi,

  We really should think about some more or less automatic policy about 
supported platforms. Discussing that on each release is not great nor for us, 
nor for our users. It takes time, to discuss it.  I guess that from outside it 
is  looking as a complete chaos, especially in context of LTS, some would 
expect that after LTS we drop support for old compilers/platforms, some would 
expect a deprecation warning first :-)

Cheers,
  Jędrek


From: Development  on 
behalf of Alex Blasche 
Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 7:57:32 PM
To: Shawn Rutledge; Jani Heikkinen
Cc: Thiago Macieira; development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

>From: Shawn Rutledge 

>> On 18 Oct 2017, at 07:34, Jani Heikkinen  wrote:
>> We discussed about this last spring and then the decision was that 5.10 is 
>> too early but 5.11 might be possible.
> So can we get that done soon on dev branch?

Sorry, no. As mentioned during the contributor summit, this decision is tabled 
until we have the 5.10 download figures.

--
Alex
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-11-08 Thread Alex Blasche 
>From: Shawn Rutledge 

>> On 18 Oct 2017, at 07:34, Jani Heikkinen  wrote:
>> We discussed about this last spring and then the decision was that 5.10 is 
>> too early but 5.11 might be possible.
> So can we get that done soon on dev branch?

Sorry, no. As mentioned during the contributor summit, this decision is tabled 
until we have the 5.10 download figures. 

--
Alex
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-11-07 Thread Shawn Rutledge 

> On 18 Oct 2017, at 07:34, Jani Heikkinen  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We discussed about this last spring and then the decision was that 5.10 is 
> too early but 5.11 might be possible. 

So can we get that done soon on dev branch?

> 
> br,
> Jani
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Development [mailto:development-
>> bounces+jani.heikkinen=qt...@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
>> Sent: keskiviikko 18. lokakuuta 2017 7.51
>> To: development@qt-project.org
>> Subject: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013
>> 
>> This came up again in QtCS and we decided that dropping it soon is probably a
>> good idea, especially after Qt 5.9 became LTS.
>> 
>> Did we decide on 5.10 or 5.11?
>> 
>> Because one of my changes for 5.10 is currently failing on MSVC 2013 as
>> designed. I need to refactor it for it to compile there.
>> 
>> Do I need to implement it? Or shall we drop that compiler?
>> --
>> Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
>>  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
>> 
>> ___
>> Development mailing list
>> Development@qt-project.org
>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-10-18 Thread Thiago Macieira 
On Tuesday, 17 October 2017 23:35:17 PDT Lars Knoll wrote:
> Since you need the patch to work on 5.10, I think we’ll need a workaround
> for VS2013.

Ok. Working around the lack of unrestricted unions is easy. But I will need to 
perform a more complete test tomorrow to see if it compiles and nothing else 
is missing.

Very likely, those Q_STATIC_ASSERTS will fail too...

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-10-17 Thread Lars Knoll 

> On 18 Oct 2017, at 07:43, Thiago Macieira  wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday, 17 October 2017 22:25:34 PDT Philippe wrote:
>>> We were. I'm asking for a quicker decision now, to decide whether I need
>>> to
>>> invest time making QRandomGenerator deterministic mode work on MSVC 2013.
>> 
>> Did you consider having a policy such as "Feature X is only available
>> for compilers that suports Y" ? (to use sparingly, of course)
> 
> Yes. New features are allowed to appear ony on compilers that support certain 
> C++ features.
> 
> That's not an option for this case, since I'm trying to get rid of the 
> qrand() 
> uses and we need QRandomGenerator in QHash.

Since you need the patch to work on 5.10, I think we’ll need a workaround for 
VS2013. 

Since this is replacing qrand(), and it’s only going to get used for one minor 
release (as I believe we should drop the compiler for 5.11), I’d be ok if it 
used the implementation that we had for qrand(), or something similar.

Lars

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-10-17 Thread Thiago Macieira 
On Tuesday, 17 October 2017 22:25:34 PDT Philippe wrote:
> > We were. I'm asking for a quicker decision now, to decide whether I need
> > to
> > invest time making QRandomGenerator deterministic mode work on MSVC 2013.
> 
> Did you consider having a policy such as "Feature X is only available
> for compilers that suports Y" ? (to use sparingly, of course)

Yes. New features are allowed to appear ony on compilers that support certain 
C++ features.

That's not an option for this case, since I'm trying to get rid of the qrand() 
uses and we need QRandomGenerator in QHash.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-10-17 Thread Jani Heikkinen 
Hi,

We discussed about this last spring and then the decision was that 5.10 is too 
early but 5.11 might be possible. 

br,
Jani

> -Original Message-
> From: Development [mailto:development-
> bounces+jani.heikkinen=qt...@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
> Sent: keskiviikko 18. lokakuuta 2017 7.51
> To: development@qt-project.org
> Subject: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013
> 
> This came up again in QtCS and we decided that dropping it soon is probably a
> good idea, especially after Qt 5.9 became LTS.
> 
> Did we decide on 5.10 or 5.11?
> 
> Because one of my changes for 5.10 is currently failing on MSVC 2013 as
> designed. I need to refactor it for it to compile there.
> 
> Do I need to implement it? Or shall we drop that compiler?
> --
> Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
>   Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
> 
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-10-17 Thread Philippe 
> We were. I'm asking for a quicker decision now, to decide whether I need to 
> invest time making QRandomGenerator deterministic mode work on MSVC 2013.

Did you consider having a policy such as "Feature X is only available
for compilers that suports Y" ? (to use sparingly, of course)

Philippe

On Tue, 17 Oct 2017 22:13:19 -0700
Thiago Macieira  wrote:

> On Tuesday, 17 October 2017 21:54:40 PDT Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> > On 18 October 2017 at 07:51, Thiago Macieira  
> wrote:
> > > This came up again in QtCS and we decided that dropping it soon is
> > > probably a good idea, especially after Qt 5.9 became LTS.
> > > 
> > > Did we decide on 5.10 or 5.11?
> > > 
> > > Because one of my changes for 5.10 is currently failing on MSVC 2013 as
> > > designed. I need to refactor it for it to compile there.
> > > 
> > > Do I need to implement it? Or shall we drop that compiler?
> > 
> > Weren't we planning to look at the download stats first?
> 
> We were. I'm asking for a quicker decision now, to decide whether I need to 
> invest time making QRandomGenerator deterministic mode work on MSVC 2013.
> 
> -- 
> Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
>   Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
> 
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development


___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-10-17 Thread Thiago Macieira 
On Tuesday, 17 October 2017 21:54:40 PDT Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> On 18 October 2017 at 07:51, Thiago Macieira  
wrote:
> > This came up again in QtCS and we decided that dropping it soon is
> > probably a good idea, especially after Qt 5.9 became LTS.
> > 
> > Did we decide on 5.10 or 5.11?
> > 
> > Because one of my changes for 5.10 is currently failing on MSVC 2013 as
> > designed. I need to refactor it for it to compile there.
> > 
> > Do I need to implement it? Or shall we drop that compiler?
> 
> Weren't we planning to look at the download stats first?

We were. I'm asking for a quicker decision now, to decide whether I need to 
invest time making QRandomGenerator deterministic mode work on MSVC 2013.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-10-17 Thread Ville Voutilainen 
On 18 October 2017 at 07:51, Thiago Macieira  wrote:
> This came up again in QtCS and we decided that dropping it soon is probably a
> good idea, especially after Qt 5.9 became LTS.
>
> Did we decide on 5.10 or 5.11?
>
> Because one of my changes for 5.10 is currently failing on MSVC 2013 as
> designed. I need to refactor it for it to compile there.
>
> Do I need to implement it? Or shall we drop that compiler?

Weren't we planning to look at the download stats first?
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

[Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

2017-10-17 Thread Thiago Macieira 
This came up again in QtCS and we decided that dropping it soon is probably a 
good idea, especially after Qt 5.9 became LTS.

Did we decide on 5.10 or 5.11?

Because one of my changes for 5.10 is currently failing on MSVC 2013 as 
designed. I need to refactor it for it to compile there.

Do I need to implement it? Or shall we drop that compiler?
-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development