Required VS compiler

[apometron]

Hello Thomas.

Nice to meet you.

I am not a programmer, so I do any error, please state so.

Is it possible to compile KDE with CodeBlocks?

If no, what is the difficulty level for that?

Good night,
Rodrigo Cesar Banhara
Surfing the WebWaves from Brazil !!! =DDDD
https://about.me/apometron

On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 03:51:02 -0300, Thomas Friedrichsmeier  
<thomas.friedrichsmeier at ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:

> Well, this thread is already split across two lists, so I'm
> cross-replying...
>
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 22:07:57 +0100
> Dominik Haumann <dhaumann at kde.org> wrote:
>> I installed Qt 5.6.0 and MSVC 2015, and surprisingly Kate
>> including all its dependencies compiled out of the box.
>>
>> I still see QStringLiteral fixes from time to time on the commit
>> mailing list. Given MSVC 2015 Community Edition is available
>> just like v2013, and it seems to work I believe that committing
>> such fixes does not make sense, in fact, it often makes code
>> worse.
>>
>> Therefore, I would like to propose v2015 as required compiler
>> and Qt5.6 as required Qt version on Windows, or are there
>> reasons against it?
>
> I'll put it the other way around. Annoying as it is, does that
> QStringLiteral nuisance justify upping the requirements? Factually that
> _is_ going to happen as the MSVC 2013 (and 2012) builds are
> going to get less testing. But I don't think that is a state we should
> actively rush into. Increased requirements always come with an
> increased cost.
>
> I don't know if anybody is producing fully official windows binaries
> based on KF5, yet. But once I will be doing that for RKWard, I know I
> will appreciate a somewhat stable environment. Say I just want to pull
> in a fix in framework X. I may have to update some dependencies, too,
> but I hope it will not mean _starting from scratch_ (new compiler, new
> Qt, etc.).
>
> Also, suppose Qt 5.6.0 turns out to have some nasty bug that I just
> can't work around. Keeping backwards compatibility with Qt 5.5 forever
> is not an option, but discarding fallback options, again, carries a
> cost.
>
>> Qt 5.5 is not precompiled for MSVC 2015, that's why increasing
>> the Qt version should be fine, especially since 5.6 is an LTS
>> version.
>
> Note that with Qt 5.5, MSVC 2013 was the _only_ supported compiler for
> QtWebEngine, not just for pre-built binaries. So MSVC 2013 would have
> been one of the most obvious choices up until one week ago.
>
> Regards
> Thomas


-- 
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/