Reason for -no-stl in qt-copy configure recommendation?

[Stephan Kulow]

On Thursday 24 April 2003 11:23, Lubos Lunak wrote:

>  ( Lighter? Hehe. Which of those typedefs and inline methods exactly should 
> make the STL support so heavyweight? ;)  ).
I don't know how you define weight, but they surely inrease parsing time needed by
the compiler.
> 
>  Why should be there anything wrong with requiring STL support in Qt? Just 
> because TrollTech supports every Nulix-0.1 doesn't mean we should too. I 
> thought it was ok to use standard C++ libs by now? And, since IIRC I saw some 
> of those warnings about obsolete C++ headers, it seems we already do use them 
> anyway.
I didn't object to the requirement, I was just pointing out that Marc wasn't speaking
about a recommendation but about a requirement.

Greetings, Stephan