On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Lubomir I. Ivanov <neolit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9 November 2015 at 22:11, Dirk Hohndel <d...@hohndel.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 11:51:30AM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote: > >> > >> Fair enough, but you won't get away with that for long :-P > >> > >> Qt 5.6 will be the last release to support building in C++98 mode. > Starting > >> with Qt 5.7, a great deal of C++11 will be mandatory and the minimum > version > >> of Xcode will be 5.1. > > > > I'll burn that bridge when we get there. > > > > But I have an important question in that context. Will you be required to > > use C++11 nonsense to USE Qt or will you be required to use a compiler > > that supports this nonsense to BUILD Qt? > > > > Because if Qt wants to stay somewhat compatible to its existing user base > > then it should be careful about staying USABLE with C++98 mode... > > > > But what this might mean is that Subsurface will try to stay on Qt 5.6 > for > > quite a while. Given that it's the long term release that may not be > > entirely unreasonable either. > > > > http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2015-June/022090.html > > CopperSpice is Qt fork discussed in the above thread: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIiwBNvTllk > > i'm quickly skipping trough it ATM. > these CopperSpice people give an interesting talk about open source, > moc, Qt contribution licensing. > they do use strictly C++11 though. > There was a lengthy e-mail exchange between CopperSpice and Qt, and thiago's answers made me stick with Qt side. > > lubomir > -- > _______________________________________________ > subsurface mailing list > subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org > http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface >
_______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface