I'm stating it now. What is your objection?
martin ________________________________ From: Development <[email protected]> on behalf of Karsten Heimrich <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 12:08 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Development] We are planning to upgrade qdoc to use clang for parsing C++ Hi, From: Development [mailto:development-bounces+karsten.heimrich=theqtcompany....@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Cristian Adam Sent: Donnerstag, 25. Februar 2016 11:20 Uhr To: Smith Martin <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Development] We are planning to upgrade qdoc to use clang for parsing C++ On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Smith Martin <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Send ideas for upgrading the Qt documentation to C++11. 1. Which C++11 constructs will be used in Qt? 2. Which of these should appear in the documentation? Send comments to the CC list. Since qdoc will be using libclang, any change of getting the same treatment for moc? I've heard these now several times without finding any reasonable source for the rumor. Can please someone point me to the place where this is stated. --Karsten
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
