[Interest] Qt5 on MSVC2008, Win7x64 (Tier1)?

[Bob Hood]

Good summary.  Thanks, Charley.  :)


On 7/10/2012 11:49 AM, Charley Bay wrote:
> Hi, All--
>
> Since the thread slowed down, here's the summary (for posterity):
>
> QUESTION:  WHAT MSVC COMPILER VERSION DESIRED FOR Qt5, TIER-1?
>
> MSVC++2005:(0-1) : X
> MSVC++2008:  (7)  : XXXXXXX
> MSVC++2010:  (6)  : XXXXXX
> MSVC++2012:  (2)  : XX
>
> ** More Notes/Comments **
>
> MSVC++2005:
>   - 2005 was stable and fast, miss that
>
> MSVC++2008:
>   - Multiple Qt4 products on 2008, very slow to convert to 2010
>
> MSVC++2010:
>   - some new C++11 features
>   - currently intended as Tier-1 for Win7x64
>
> MSVC++2012:
>   - would-be-nice for more C++11 features
>   - appears to address some concerns about 2010
>   - may not install MSVC2012 until SP1 comes out
>   - intended to be supported for Qt5 at some point, unsure of configurations
>
> Other:
>   - several developers (3+) using both MSVC2008 and MSVC2010 to support
> existing products, cannot move entirely to MSVC2010 (yet).
>   - MSVC is best-in-the-industry for "integrated-debugging", but concerns
> exist about future-of-MSVC in-general
>
> ----------------------
> Final comment:
> ----------------------
>
> I agree with Bob that the MSVC-integrated-debugging is the
> best-in-the-industry (the main reason we use it), and also agree that I'm
> quite concerned about the future-of-IDEs and the (stupid) Web-ification
> (!!?? "Developer-Facebook-Points" for generating every possible
> "Compiler-Warning"?!!)
>
> It seems like users dealing with existing-product-support are "straddling"
> both MSVC2008/MSVC2010 for multiple internal Qt4 products, where more-work
> would be required to fully migrate to MSVC2010 (i.e., to drop reliance upon
> MSVC2008).
>
> There seems to be some interest in moving to MSVC2012 to get new C++11
> features.  For example, we would skip MSVC2010 entirely and move from
> MSVC2008 directly to MSVC2012.
>
> We happen to be running "Win7x64" as an operating system, but only need to
> generate 32-bit applications.  (So our "target-configuration" is for 32-bit
> apps on 64-bit operating system, we deploy the same binaries to other 32-bit
> operating systems.)
>
> I realize this is an "unscientific" poll.  I'm not advocating at this time,
> so I didn't further pursue this topic (such as by posting a "Poll" in the
> qt-project forums).  Vendors might consider doing that to ensure supported
> platforms appropriately target their user base.
>
> --charley
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20120710/bc1858bf/attachment.html>