Lars Knoll wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Jun 1999, Stefan Westerfeld wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > On Mon, Jun 21, 1999 at 11:40:10AM +0200, weis@stud.uni-frankfurt.de wrote: > > > It seems that people are very fast with removing STL. > > > > > > That means that we should switch as fast as possible to > > > mini-stl. Since mini-stl implements only what mico needs > > > but not what the standard says, we can not use real > > > STL code when linking with mico any more. > > > > > > So: Does anybody still use real STL in combination > > > with KDE&Mico ? If so we have to solve that first. > > > > > > Unfortunately libkoml uses STL a lot, but only simple stuff > > > so that it could even work with mini-stl perhaps. > > > > > > Using mini-stl ill decrease compile time and size of > > > the executables dramatically. > > > > I am not sure wether this is a good idea. Well - I am using STL in Arts, > > and switching to QTL is no good option, since the Arts server should not > > depend on Qt. I thought CORBA could make it happen that the KDE project > > not only produces code that can only be used in the KDE context itself, > > but also outside. > > As the mini-stl is a subset of the stl, I think, KDE should still work if > you compile mico using the STL. It's just that one should be able to do > the compilation with the mini-stl, and that KDE apps/libs shouldn't > use features of the STL which the mini-stl doesn't have. > > > The same concern I have against making a mico version that does not > > support the standard CORBA binding any more. While forcing everybody > > to use a crippled version of STL in their code instead of a real > > version only makes "portable code" (in a sense of porting to anything > > that has a standard C++ compiler) harder, since mini-stl containers are > > not powerful anymore, going to a totally nonstandard CORBA binding > > which will only work with Qt makes it impossible. > > I'm not sure about that. While not knowing anything about MICO's > internals, I would guess, that one could just add some configure switches > like --enable-qt-binding and --enable-c++-binding to MICO. If done the > right way, one could probably compile mico with both bindings enabled. Hmm, wouldn't it be just an option to the idl compiler? Greetings, Stephan -- Und sie nannten ihn, wie er selbst unterschrieb - Den Trojanischen Pferdedieb