From koffice  Mon Aug 30 20:35:42 1999
From: Tomas Cernaj <tcernaj () Stud-Mailer ! Uni-Marburg ! DE>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 20:35:42 +0000
To: koffice
Subject: Re: ministl
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=koffice&m=93604519128457

Stephan Kulow wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> OK, I patched koffice to compile against ministl, but
> unfortunatly it's not as easy I thought it would be.
> killustrator/xmlutils/XmlWriter.h
> uses stack, but ministl (or Qt) doesn't implement a
> stack, so I can't just use ministl there ;(
> 
> So: should we leave ministl behind and port to QTL
> right away? But this would still leave you behind
> with the problem that you can't use stack as long
> as mico is configure with mini-stl (which is the
> default). My favorite solution would be if koffice
> wouldn't depend on mico's ministl compile option at
> all, but I'm not sure how we would buy that ;(
> 
> Any ideas? Just reimplement stack? It's not that hard,
> as it's a single ended sequence only anyway :)
> 
> Greetings, Stephan
> 
> --
> Programmers, heed this: If someone starts asking you about
> agricultural genomes, it's likely time to get a handler.
>                                 zdnet.com about Torvalds

What about mico's port to use ministl in a namespace? Do the mico people
work on that?
I wouldn't like to not be able to use STL for things like own datatypes
(for example you can fully integrate them with I/O streams etc.).
As far as libg++ is concerned, I think it's a long way to go for the
correct implementation of the std:: namespace.

cu, Tomas