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

[André Wöbbeking]

On Monday 28 April 2003 20:31, George Staikos wrote:
> On Monday 28 April 2003 14:07, Ravikiran Rajagopal wrote:

> > Plus, I don't see why preventing interoperability between QTL & STL
> > is beneficial when measured against the cost of using
> > well-understood constantly evolving algorithms that are widely
> > deployed.
>
>    We are not preventing interoperability.  it is a question of
> whether KDE CVS, "KDE as a project", should be writing STL code in
> KDE CVS.  We have standardized on Qt, not glib, not STL.

and on C++ and STL is part of C++ for many years.


André