Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Ivan Čukić
> It isn't. The page is just plainly wrong. In that case, I retract my previous comments. Where are the *proper* requirements documented then (for future reference)? > That's the list of platforms the Qt CI tests on. It lists both CI tested and untested things there. -- Cheerio, Ivan

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Thomas Lübking
We could just detect the compiler, and in need define nullptr 0x0, look the other side and hope for the best (ie. anybody on modern compilers anyway and nobody actually making use of std::nullptr_t atm. but just of the keyword) - not very nice, but better than breaking compilation(?) and not as

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Friday 14 August 2015 01:08:19 Ivan Čukić wrote: > This is from the "Officially supported platforms" page at > http://doc.qt.io/QtSupportedPlatforms/ > > Qt 5.5: > Windows * - MinGW 4.9, MinGW 4.8 (apart from MSVC) > Linux - 32/64bitgcc 4.8.1, gcc 4.9.1 > > I thought that was official enough.

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Ivan Čukić
This is from the "Officially supported platforms" page at http://doc.qt.io/QtSupportedPlatforms/ Qt 5.5: Windows * - MinGW 4.9, MinGW 4.8 (apart from MSVC) Linux - 32/64bitgcc 4.8.1, gcc 4.9.1 I thought that was official enough. Cheers, Ivan

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Thursday 13 August 2015 12:59:01 Ivan Čukić wrote: > Qt 5.5 requires gcc 4.8 for linux and windows. So even they increment > the versions from time to time. s/8/5/ and you'd be correct. The Qt minimum version will rise to GCC 4.7 with Qt 5.7 and Qt will stop compiling in C++98 mode at that ti

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Luigi Toscano
On Thursday 13 of August 2015 15:01:16 Ivan Čukić wrote: > > What I don't like in this story is that we set up a rule, an promise with > > users, which was broken and now it's like it does not matter. > > Yes, we did set up the rule requirements for gcc 4.5 and MSVC10 back in > 2013. > > Since th

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Ivan Čukić
> What I don't like in this story is that we set up a rule, an promise with > users, which was broken and now it's like it does not matter. Yes, we did set up the rule requirements for gcc 4.5 and MSVC10 back in 2013. Since then, we broke the rule and increased to MSVC11 (VS2012). Now, we can in

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Luigi Toscano
On Thursday 13 of August 2015 12:59:01 Ivan Čukić wrote: > >> I prefer the first option, it's the way forward and if someone was using > > > > I'd say that requiring a newer gcc just like that would go against the > > nature of the KF5 project. > > I don't really see why it is "against the nature

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Lamarque Souza
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 7:59 AM, Ivan Čukić wrote: > >> I prefer the first option, it's the way forward and if someone was using > > > > I'd say that requiring a newer gcc just like that would go against the > > nature of the KF5 project. > > I don't really see why it is "against the nature of KF

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Ivan Čukić
>> I prefer the first option, it's the way forward and if someone was using > > I'd say that requiring a newer gcc just like that would go against the > nature of the KF5 project. I don't really see why it is "against the nature of KF5". It would not be the first time we require a higher compiler

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Aleix Pol
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Sergio Martins wrote: > Hi, > > > https://community.kde.org/Frameworks/Policies#Frameworks_compiler_requirements_and_C.2B.2B11 > states gcc 4.5 as the minimum version, meaning we can't use nullptr. > > However, since some time now, kf5 libraries are full of nullpt

Re: Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Dominik Haumann
I'll only comment on the application side: On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Sergio Martins wrote: > Btw, what are the c++98/c++11 requirements for applications ? I could only > find > the page for frameworks. For applications, it's 100% up to the application developer. I'm sure it wouldn't be

Jenkins-kde-ci: kdelibs KDE-4.14 latest-qt4 » Linux,gcc - Build # 12 - Still Unstable!

2015-08-13 Thread no-reply
GENERAL INFO BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL: https://build.kde.org/job/kdelibs%20KDE-4.14%20latest-qt4/PLATFORM=Linux,compiler=gcc/12/ Project: PLATFORM=Linux,compiler=gcc Date of build: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 20:46:54 + Build duration: 14 min CHANGE SET Revision 8e817978fb37d800702023af9b9ae476a25e5e8

Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

2015-08-13 Thread Sergio Martins
Hi, https://community.kde.org/Frameworks/Policies#Frameworks_compiler_requirements_and_C.2B.2B11 states gcc 4.5 as the minimum version, meaning we can't use nullptr. However, since some time now, kf5 libraries are full of nullptr (~400 occurrences) and nobody noticed. We can either: - Bump t

Jenkins-kde-ci: kdelibs KDE-4.14 stable-qt4 » Linux,gcc - Build # 11 - Still Unstable!

2015-08-13 Thread no-reply
GENERAL INFO BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL: https://build.kde.org/job/kdelibs%20KDE-4.14%20stable-qt4/PLATFORM=Linux,compiler=gcc/11/ Project: PLATFORM=Linux,compiler=gcc Date of build: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 20:46:54 + Build duration: 36 min CHANGE SET Revision 8e817978fb37d800702023af9b9ae476a25e5e8