Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qt 5.0 Is Using More C++11 Features

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • phoronix
    started a topic Qt 5.0 Is Using More C++11 Features

    Qt 5.0 Is Using More C++11 Features

    Phoronix: Qt 5.0 Is Using More C++11 Features

    The Qt 5.0 tool-kit is beginning to take greater advantage of the C++11 programming language update...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTExODA

  • uid313
    replied
    Go + Qt

    Wouldn't Go + Qt be double awesome?
    Or Vala + Qt?
    How about C# + Qt?

    Leave a comment:


  • cbamber85
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    There's a poll, asking people what they consider important for Qt 5. C++ and desktop integration, contrary to the developers saying that "people aren't interested in that, everybody wants javascript", are very important :-)

    http://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/16693
    I've been using Qt years, and not even Nokia taking ownership of Qt from TrollTech, has caused as much as a backlash as all this QML bollocks. To be fair Nokia's profile has really raised Qt's, but the mobile phone influence has been.. Misapplied.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    Hmm...



    Why the weirdness? Why not define constexpr to nothing when the compiler doesn't support it, and not define it at all when there's support? Would have been much better design.
    Most likely to avoid interfering with other code. Existing codebases may already define their own constexpr macro, and it's not polite for a 3rd party lib to overwrite that.

    Leave a comment:


  • RealNC
    replied
    Hmm...

    This new constexpr C++11 keyword can be added to annotate some inline functions to specify that they could be computed at compile time. In Qt 5, we introduced Q_DECL_CONSTEXPR which is defined to constexpr when the compiler supports it, or nothing otherwise.
    Why the weirdness? Why not define constexpr to nothing when the compiler doesn't support it, and not define it at all when there's support? Would have been much better design.

    Leave a comment:


  • RealNC
    replied
    There's a poll, asking people what they consider important for Qt 5. C++ and desktop integration, contrary to the developers saying that "people aren't interested in that, everybody wants javascript", are very important :-)

    http://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/16693

    Leave a comment:


  • Alex Sarmiento
    replied
    QT shloud be the defacto tool kit for linux

    Developers should dismiss the gtk and java garbage

    Leave a comment:


  • uid313
    replied
    C++ without Qt sucks?

    C++ without Qt sucks?

    Leave a comment:


  • mirv
    replied
    To be pedantic - it's support for explicit virtual function override. The keyword here is literally "override" (as in it's a C++11 keyword).

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X