> On Feb. 13, 2012, 11:30 a.m., David Faure wrote:
> > Out of curiosity, if the method returns void anyway, why is this attribute
> > necessary? It's not like the the compiler is going to warn about the lack
> > of a return value...
>From the GNU Compiler documentation: "The noreturn keyword t
On Friday 17 February 2012, Till Adam wrote:
> On Feb 17, 2012, at 12:25 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > On Friday 17 February 2012, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> >> Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> we have support for Windows CE in kdelibs.
> >>> At least on the buildsystem side, this l
On Feb 17, 2012, at 12:25 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Friday 17 February 2012, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>> Alexander Neundorf wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> we have support for Windows CE in kdelibs.
>>> At least on the buildsystem side, this looks more like a hack.
>>>
>>> Do we want to keep this f
On Friday 17 February 2012, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > we have support for Windows CE in kdelibs.
> > At least on the buildsystem side, this looks more like a hack.
> >
> > Do we want to keep this for KDE frameworks ?
>
> I don't think it's a big problem in
Hi,
we have support for Windows CE in kdelibs.
At least on the buildsystem side, this looks more like a hack.
Do we want to keep this for KDE frameworks ?
I'm for removing it. WinCE is IMO just too different for us to support it.
Basically that's also what Till said in his talk at the Desktop S
