> -----Original Message----- > From: Ville Voutilainen [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, 24 January 2018 11:25 AM > To: Alexander Nassian <[email protected]> > Cc: Mitch Curtis <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Development] #pragma once > > On 24 January 2018 at 12:22, Alexander Nassian <nassian@bitshift- > dynamics.com> wrote: > > Maybe because it’s not part of the C++ standard? > > #pragma once is not a replacement for include guards.
Why not? > It's not part of the C++ standard because it doesn't always work In which ways? My quick search gave me these: https://stackoverflow.com/a/1946730/904422 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragma_once#Caveats There's also this answer that highly recommends against it, but seems quite contended in the comments: https://stackoverflow.com/a/34884735/904422 > and modules are a superior solution anyway. How so? _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
