Qt 4.6

[David Johnson]

On Wednesday 10 June 2009 11:49:49 am Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is there a valid reason to define Bool in a C++ program? Normally it is a
> big WTF. This sounds like an artifact for very old compilers. Maybe it is
> possible to fix Qt to not depend on Bool?

"Bool" is being used in an enumeration of metatypes, along with "Void", 
"Double", etc. This is a perfectly appropriate use, imho. The problem is with 
X11 and C, and demonstrates the problems of #define.

-- 
David Johnson