Using nullptr instead of Q_NULLPTR

[Luigi Toscano]

On Thursday 13 of August 2015 12:59:01 Ivan Čukić wrote:
> >> I prefer the first option, it's the way forward and if someone was using
> > 
> > I'd say that requiring a newer gcc just like that would go against the
> > nature of the KF5 project.
> 
> I don't really see why it is "against the nature of KF5". It would not
> be the first time we require a higher compiler version than the one
> required by the Qt version we require.

But then we need a clear agreement.

I don't care about proprietary compilers whose version released two years ago 
does not support extensions supported for years already by FLOSS compilers. 
What I don't like in this story is that we set up a rule, an promise with 
users, which was broken and now it's like it does not matter.

> 
> Qt 5.5 requires gcc 4.8 for linux and windows. So even they increment
> the versions from time to time.
> 
> We can switch everything to Q_NULLPTR even without anyone complaining
> about it, but we will have to switch back in a few releases.

But we are not there in those few releases, which could be months away. The 
things to do is follow the rule and revert the changes, and then *after* 
change the rule. IMHO.

Ciao
-- 
Luigi