IMO, we can mix libc++/libstd because we have some BC guarantees, not we have BC guarantees because we *need* to mix them. There’s no real difference between debug/release and libc++/libstd. Still, we need those guarantees not to rebuild whole KDE packages in linux distros each time new Qt version (or new stdlib version if we’ll support std:: in API) is released (also, users should reinstall those packages too)
Иван Комиссаров 19 нояб. 2016 г., в 15:07, Marc Mutz <marc.m...@kdab.com> написал(а): > As soon as someone explains to me what the material difference is between a) > supporting mixing libc++ and libstdc++ on Unix platforms and b) supporting > mixing release and debug runtimes on Windows, I'm open for discussing the > merits of the former. Until then, I refuse to see a difference between the > two, refuse to accept that we need to support one and not the other, and > suggest to just compile two versions of Qt: libQt5*Foo-libc++.so and > libQt5*Foo-libstdc++.so. If this solves the problem on Windows, someone needs > to explain to me why it's not an option on Unix. > > Thanks, > Marc > > -- > Marc Mutz <marc.m...@kdab.com> | Senior Software Engineer > KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company > Tel: +49-30-521325470 > KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts > _______________________________________________ > 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
