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

[Guillaume Laurent]

On Tuesday 29 April 2003 00:29, George Staikos wrote:
> >
> > what kind of STL bugs you're speaking about?
>
>   Search kde-cvs archives.  You will find commits from dirk or myself to
> modules to fix problems with STL code not compiling on newer gcc releases.

Then these are gcc bugs. I've had a few of those too, gcc will blissfully 
compile erroneous STL-related code, then a newer release will complain about 
it.

> > > code, dumped it in CVS, then disappeared.  IMO code that uses STL and
> > > is not maintained should be reverted to pre-STL, or removed.
> >
> > Why, only because it's STL?
>
>   Because it doesn't follow existing coding standards, and because the
> people who generally end up fixing these bugs are probably more comfortable
> with Qt given how much time they spend with it.

I assume you mean "existing KDE coding standards" here ? And anyway, Qt is 
getting closer to the STL. There's already very little difference, the Qt 
collections classes are just more specialized instantiations of regular STL 
containers. Eventually there won't be much of a difference.

I do agree that the STL is too complicated and (in the general case) not well 
documented enough. But I think it's delusional to think you'll always be able 
to avoid using it.

-- 
						Guillaume.
						http://www.telegraph-road.org