Hi Steve,
On Thursday 09 February 2017 00:52:03 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> In my opinion, the problem is sd-6 defining feature macros in the header
> that contains the implementation, instead of in a single header.
Indeed, this would have been a valid _other_ way to do things:
#include // conta
On quarta-feira, 8 de fevereiro de 2017 23:52:03 PST Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Marc Mutz wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just filed https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79433
> > complaining that __has_include returns true for headers which then, when
> > included, #error out about the wrong C++ sta
On quinta-feira, 9 de fevereiro de 2017 01:11:18 PST Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> Il 08/02/2017 23:43, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:
> > I'd rather not and just suppress functionality until the compiler gets
> > their act together. Our users should file bugs with their vendors instead
> > to pressure t
Il 08/02/2017 23:43, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:
> I'd rather not and just suppress functionality until the compiler gets their
> act together. Our users should file bugs with their vendors instead to
> pressure
> them to change their way.
They did and the result was a WONTFIX:
> https://conne
Marc Mutz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just filed https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79433
> complaining that __has_include returns true for headers which then, when
> included, #error out about the wrong C++ standard used.
In my opinion, the problem is sd-6 defining feature macros in the header
On quarta-feira, 8 de fevereiro de 2017 20:40:04 PST Marc Mutz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just filed https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79433
> complaining that __has_include returns true for headers which then, when
> included, #error out about the wrong C++ standard used.
I'm with you. SD-6 s
On quarta-feira, 8 de fevereiro de 2017 22:33:25 PST Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> Of course, MSVC does not bump __cplusplus (still 199711L). So perhaps
> those version checks need to become Qt macros?
I'd rather not and just suppress functionality until the compiler gets their
act together. Our use
Il 08/02/2017 20:40, Marc Mutz ha scritto:
> I, however, intended to use the same feature for and
> , which don't seem to have SD-6 feature test
> macros (or else define them in the header which you're not allowed to
> include to check), but since we compile qmake only in C++11, not higher,
>
Hi,
I just filed https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79433
complaining that __has_include returns true for headers which then, when
included, #error out about the wrong C++ standard used.
We use this mechanism for at least , and are either about to
ship it or already do. That's fine
