[Development] Abandoning the container changes
Stephen Kelly
stephen.kelly at kdab.com
Wed Jul 18 14:52:05 CEST 2012
On Wednesday, July 18, 2012 14:00:08 Marc Mutz wrote:
> The question is just: which one is more work? And frankly, no-one knows,
> because there's no experience with inline namespaces (even though GCC uses
> something similar for the debug STL containers for a long time).
I believe the llvm community libc++ uses inline namespaces, but that might not
have the widespread use and multiple versions required to really get the
required experience.
I don't think breaking binary compatibility in a 5.x release is a good idea.
As was said previously, if it's Qt 6, call it Qt 6.
Thanks,
--
Stephen Kelly <stephen.kelly at kdab.com> | Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company
www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-Independent Software Solutions
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20120718/54b12cbb/attachment.sig>
More information about the Development
mailing list