On Thursday, 19 September 2019 06:23:26 PDT Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development wrote: > On 18/09/2019 01:37, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > Marc's proposal is that we should accept that these things are rare and > > simply correct when they do happen. Since our code is tested with the > > currently latest versions of all compilers, we're fairly sure that any > > such macro works with the compilers that currently support the feature. > > This is not entirely accurate, we don't have configurations in the CI > that use /std:c++latest or similar flags. It's basically saying "our > users will find out". But as I said it's really paranoid at the moment.
We don't test /std:c++latest because it's a bit unstable for us. Whoever uses that gets to fix issues. But we did test -std=c++1z before C++17 because for GCC and Clang those were actually ok. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel System Software Products _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
