| Trolltech Home | Qt-interest Home | Recent Threads | All Threads | Author | Date | |
| All threads index page 1 | |
Visual Studio 6 support being dropped???? http://trolltech.com/developer/notes/supported_platforms I do not understand why?? it's cheap and works very well for a lot of projects... I hope it's just a mistake... -- [ signature omitted ]
On December 5, 2007 09:41:59 am Pat wrote: > Visual Studio 6 support being dropped???? > > http://trolltech.com/developer/notes/supported_platforms > > I do not understand why?? > it's cheap and works very well for a lot of projects... > > I hope it's just a mistake... Visual Studio 6 has atrocious support for C++. You are doing yourself a massive disservice not upgrading to at least Visual C++ .Net 2003 aka VC++ 7.1 (not the half-step, .Net 2002, VC++ 7.0). Really, Visual C++ 6.0 was released almost ten years ago. It is well worth taking advantage of Microsoft's increased compliance with the C++ standard and advances in optimisation since that time. -- [ signature omitted ]
Do you really think that just better C++ standard compliance and "advances in optimization" really deserve the effort involved in changing the whole 6.0 thing for the 7.1?? please give me something better.... are you with the MS Vista team??? "Chris Thompson" <cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:200712051050.50340.cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > On December 5, 2007 09:41:59 am Pat wrote: >> Visual Studio 6 support being dropped???? >> >> http://trolltech.com/developer/notes/supported_platforms >> >> I do not understand why?? >> it's cheap and works very well for a lot of projects... >> >> I hope it's just a mistake... > > Visual Studio 6 has atrocious support for C++. You are doing yourself a > massive disservice not upgrading to at least Visual C++ .Net 2003 aka VC++ > 7.1 (not the half-step, .Net 2002, VC++ 7.0). > > Really, Visual C++ 6.0 was released almost ten years ago. It is well > worth > taking advantage of Microsoft's increased compliance with the C++ standard > and advances in optimisation since that time. > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ -- [ signature omitted ]
See: On December 5, 2007 10:23:26 am Pat wrote: > Do you really think that just better C++ standard compliance and "advances > in optimization" > really deserve the effort involved in changing the whole 6.0 thing for the > 7.1?? > please give me something better.... > > are you with the MS Vista team??? > > > > > > "Chris Thompson" <cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message > news:200712051050.50340.cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > On December 5, 2007 09:41:59 am Pat wrote: > >> Visual Studio 6 support being dropped???? > >> > >> http://trolltech.com/developer/notes/supported_platforms > >> > >> I do not understand why?? > >> it's cheap and works very well for a lot of projects... > >> > >> I hope it's just a mistake... > > > > Visual Studio 6 has atrocious support for C++. You are doing yourself a > > massive disservice not upgrading to at least Visual C++ .Net 2003 aka > > VC++ 7.1 (not the half-step, .Net 2002, VC++ 7.0). > > > > Really, Visual C++ 6.0 was released almost ten years ago. It is well > > worth > > taking advantage of Microsoft's increased compliance with the C++ > > standard and advances in optimisation since that time. > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. List archive and information: > http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ -- [ signature omitted ]
Actually... If you wrote clean C++ code, the main headache is going to be having to use the std namespace. But if your concerned at all about cross platform compatibility, the transition should be very straight forward, since you probably have the namespace issue resolved with macros or other known solutions. But you WILL notice a dramatic improvement in runtime, when I move, now 5+ years ago (to 7.0) I saw upwards of 20+% in runtime improvement... for FREE... Scott > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 10:33 AM > To: qt-interest@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: Pat > Subject: Re: Visual Studio 6 support being dropped ?? > > See: > > On December 5, 2007 10:23:26 am Pat wrote: > > Do you really think that just better C++ standard compliance and > "advances > > in optimization" > > really deserve the effort involved in changing the whole 6.0 thing for > the > > 7.1?? > > please give me something better.... > > > > are you with the MS Vista team??? > > > > > > > > > > > > "Chris Thompson" <cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message > > news:200712051050.50340.cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > On December 5, 2007 09:41:59 am Pat wrote: > > >> Visual Studio 6 support being dropped???? > > >> > > >> http://trolltech.com/developer/notes/supported_platforms > > >> > > >> I do not understand why?? > > >> it's cheap and works very well for a lot of projects... > > >> > > >> I hope it's just a mistake... > > > > > > Visual Studio 6 has atrocious support for C++. You are doing yourself > a > > > massive disservice not upgrading to at least Visual C++ .Net 2003 aka > > > VC++ 7.1 (not the half-step, .Net 2002, VC++ 7.0). > > > > > > Really, Visual C++ 6.0 was released almost ten years ago. It is well > > > worth > > > taking advantage of Microsoft's increased compliance with the C++ > > > standard and advances in optimisation since that time. > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > > > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > > > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. List archive and information: > > http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ -- [ signature omitted ]
See: http://www.ondotnet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2002/11/18/everettcpp.html This article probably vastly understates the C++ compliance issues with Visual C++ 6.0. The optimisation advances are probably not worth the upgrade except in extremely performance-critical code (in which case you'd probably be looking at ICC anyway) but the C++ compliance issues along with some of the other helpful advances such as the 64-bit portability checks and stack checks are, in my opinion, well worth the upgrade. Whether or not you agree will depend on your situation. I find it hard to imagine writing modern C++ code and having to use Visual C++ 6.0, however. You may wish to remember that Visual C++ 2008 is due out shortly; I cannot speak as to whether that's a worthwhile upgrade. I think it should be clear from my email address that I have nothing to do with MS Vista. On December 5, 2007 10:23:26 am Pat wrote: > Do you really think that just better C++ standard compliance and "advances > in optimization" > really deserve the effort involved in changing the whole 6.0 thing for the > 7.1?? > please give me something better.... > > are you with the MS Vista team??? > > > > > > "Chris Thompson" <cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message > news:200712051050.50340.cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > On December 5, 2007 09:41:59 am Pat wrote: > >> Visual Studio 6 support being dropped???? > >> > >> http://trolltech.com/developer/notes/supported_platforms > >> > >> I do not understand why?? > >> it's cheap and works very well for a lot of projects... > >> > >> I hope it's just a mistake... > > > > Visual Studio 6 has atrocious support for C++. You are doing yourself a > > massive disservice not upgrading to at least Visual C++ .Net 2003 aka > > VC++ 7.1 (not the half-step, .Net 2002, VC++ 7.0). > > > > Really, Visual C++ 6.0 was released almost ten years ago. It is well > > worth > > taking advantage of Microsoft's increased compliance with the C++ > > standard and advances in optimisation since that time. > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. List archive and information: > http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ -- [ signature omitted ]
>Whether or not you agree will depend on your situation that's deeply true, we don't care at all about the 20% run time improvement of the new compilers... we don't care at all about C++ standard compliance... we care about run time available everywhere!! > I think it should be clear from my email address that I have nothing to do > with MS Vista. well you haven't got my irony... I'm a bit tired of people trying to justify new versions of everything just because the old one is just too old and it looks no cool anymore! Do you think that Windows Vista was a necessary change from XP....???? "Chris Thompson" <cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:200712051138.16834.cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > See: > http://www.ondotnet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2002/11/18/everettcpp.html > > This article probably vastly understates the C++ compliance issues with > Visual > C++ 6.0. The optimisation advances are probably not worth the upgrade > except > in extremely performance-critical code (in which case you'd probably be > looking at ICC anyway) but the C++ compliance issues along with some of > the > other helpful advances such as the 64-bit portability checks and stack > checks > are, in my opinion, well worth the upgrade. > > Whether or not you agree will depend on your situation. I find it hard to > imagine writing modern C++ code and having to use Visual C++ 6.0, however. > You may wish to remember that Visual C++ 2008 is due out shortly; I cannot > speak as to whether that's a worthwhile upgrade. > > I think it should be clear from my email address that I have nothing to do > with MS Vista. > > On December 5, 2007 10:23:26 am Pat wrote: >> Do you really think that just better C++ standard compliance and >> "advances >> in optimization" >> really deserve the effort involved in changing the whole 6.0 thing for >> the >> 7.1?? >> please give me something better.... >> >> are you with the MS Vista team??? >> >> >> >> >> >> "Chris Thompson" <cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message >> news:200712051050.50340.cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> > On December 5, 2007 09:41:59 am Pat wrote: >> >> Visual Studio 6 support being dropped???? >> >> >> >> http://trolltech.com/developer/notes/supported_platforms >> >> >> >> I do not understand why?? >> >> it's cheap and works very well for a lot of projects... >> >> >> >> I hope it's just a mistake... >> > >> > Visual Studio 6 has atrocious support for C++. You are doing yourself >> > a >> > massive disservice not upgrading to at least Visual C++ .Net 2003 aka >> > VC++ 7.1 (not the half-step, .Net 2002, VC++ 7.0). >> > >> > Really, Visual C++ 6.0 was released almost ten years ago. It is well >> > worth >> > taking advantage of Microsoft's increased compliance with the C++ >> > standard and advances in optimisation since that time. >> > >> > -- >> > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with >> > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. >> > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with >> "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. List archive and information: >> http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ -- [ signature omitted ]
On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 12:39:23PM -0700, Pat wrote: > >Whether or not you agree will depend on your situation > that's deeply true, we don't care at all about the 20% run time improvement > of the new compilers... we don't care at all about C++ standard > compliance... we care about run time available everywhere!! > > > I think it should be clear from my email address that I have nothing to do > > with MS Vista. > well you haven't got my irony... I'm a bit tired of people trying to justify > new versions of everything just because the old one is just too old and it > looks no cool anymore! Do you think that Windows Vista was a necessary > change from XP....???? Okay, so you don't upgrade from VS6. Fine. You also don't upgrade the Qt version you are using. It's not like the code you have compiled against Qt in VS6 right now is going to stop working. You just won't be able to upgrade to a newer version of Qt without upgrading to a newer compiler. The following is based on the assumption that TrollTech is acting rationally, in an economic sense, and is confident in its analysis of costs and market: The cost to TrollTech to support VS6's craptastic C++ implementation has (finally) outweighed the value to supporting it for them. TrollTech is unwilling to take the hit in productivity and time to market that VS6 support incurs. You do not pay enough for your Qt license to make it worth their while, and even if dropping VS6 support loses your business and some number of other licenses the opportunity costs of supporting VS6 outweigh the cost of losing that business. Your economic costs, whatever they may be, do not factor into it. You are not TrollTech's target market. Their target market uses (reasonably) standards-compliant C++ compilers. They have selected a market in which they can make money, and have pared out a market segment (the one in which you fall) that costs them more than it benefits them. You may feel free to join the target market, or you may feel free to attempt to backport the new features in new versions of Qt. You may take on the burden of supporting VS6, but TrollTech has chosen not to. In short: Upgrade both your compiler and Qt, or upgrade neither, or support it yourself. Whining is not going to change anything. --Greg > "Chris Thompson" <cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message > news:200712051138.16834.cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > See: > > http://www.ondotnet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2002/11/18/everettcpp.html > > > > This article probably vastly understates the C++ compliance issues with > > Visual > > C++ 6.0. The optimisation advances are probably not worth the upgrade > > except > > in extremely performance-critical code (in which case you'd probably be > > looking at ICC anyway) but the C++ compliance issues along with some of > > the > > other helpful advances such as the 64-bit portability checks and stack > > checks > > are, in my opinion, well worth the upgrade. > > > > Whether or not you agree will depend on your situation. I find it hard to > > imagine writing modern C++ code and having to use Visual C++ 6.0, however. > > You may wish to remember that Visual C++ 2008 is due out shortly; I cannot > > speak as to whether that's a worthwhile upgrade. > > > > I think it should be clear from my email address that I have nothing to do > > with MS Vista. > > > > On December 5, 2007 10:23:26 am Pat wrote: > >> Do you really think that just better C++ standard compliance and > >> "advances > >> in optimization" > >> really deserve the effort involved in changing the whole 6.0 thing for > >> the > >> 7.1?? > >> please give me something better.... > >> > >> are you with the MS Vista team??? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> "Chris Thompson" <cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message > >> news:200712051050.50340.cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> > >> > On December 5, 2007 09:41:59 am Pat wrote: > >> >> Visual Studio 6 support being dropped???? > >> >> > >> >> http://trolltech.com/developer/notes/supported_platforms > >> >> > >> >> I do not understand why?? > >> >> it's cheap and works very well for a lot of projects... > >> >> > >> >> I hope it's just a mistake... > >> > > >> > Visual Studio 6 has atrocious support for C++. You are doing yourself > >> > a > >> > massive disservice not upgrading to at least Visual C++ .Net 2003 aka > >> > VC++ 7.1 (not the half-step, .Net 2002, VC++ 7.0). > >> > > >> > Really, Visual C++ 6.0 was released almost ten years ago. It is well > >> > worth > >> > taking advantage of Microsoft's increased compliance with the C++ > >> > standard and advances in optimisation since that time. > >> > > >> > -- > >> > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > >> > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > >> > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > >> > >> -- > >> To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > >> "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. List archive and information: > >> http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > -- [ signature omitted ]
> Okay, so you don't upgrade from VS6. Fine. You also don't upgrade the Qt > version you are using. It's not like the code you have compiled against Qt > in VS6 right now is going to stop working. You just won't be able to > upgrade to a newer version of Qt without upgrading to a newer compiler. > I already know that... > The following is based on the assumption that TrollTech is acting > rationally, in an economic sense, and is confident in its analysis of > costs > and market: > > The cost to TrollTech to support VS6's craptastic C++ implementation has > (finally) outweighed the value to supporting it for them. TrollTech is > unwilling to take the hit in productivity and time to market that VS6 > support incurs. You do not pay enough for your Qt license to make it worth > their while, and even if dropping VS6 support loses your business and some > number of other licenses the opportunity costs of supporting VS6 outweigh > the cost of losing that business. > > Your economic costs, whatever they may be, do not factor into it. You are > not TrollTech's target market. Their target market uses (reasonably) > standards-compliant C++ compilers. They have selected a market in which > they can make money, and have pared out a market segment (the one in which > you fall) that costs them more than it benefits them. You may feel free to > join the target market, or you may feel free to attempt to backport the > new > features in new versions of Qt. You may take on the burden of supporting > VS6, but TrollTech has chosen not to. > > In short: Upgrade both your compiler and Qt, or upgrade neither, or > support > it yourself. Whining is not going to change anything. > > --Greg are you lecturing me on economics??? Well, I don't need that... I'm just a Trolltech customer and I have the right to tell them my opinion about what they are planning to do, I think if there are more people like us they might reconsider the thing, that's it. Pat >> "Chris Thompson" <cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message >> news:200712051138.16834.cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> > See: >> > http://www.ondotnet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2002/11/18/everettcpp.html >> > >> > This article probably vastly understates the C++ compliance issues with >> > Visual >> > C++ 6.0. The optimisation advances are probably not worth the upgrade >> > except >> > in extremely performance-critical code (in which case you'd probably be >> > looking at ICC anyway) but the C++ compliance issues along with some of >> > the >> > other helpful advances such as the 64-bit portability checks and stack >> > checks >> > are, in my opinion, well worth the upgrade. >> > >> > Whether or not you agree will depend on your situation. I find it hard >> > to >> > imagine writing modern C++ code and having to use Visual C++ 6.0, >> > however. >> > You may wish to remember that Visual C++ 2008 is due out shortly; I >> > cannot >> > speak as to whether that's a worthwhile upgrade. >> > >> > I think it should be clear from my email address that I have nothing to >> > do >> > with MS Vista. >> > >> > On December 5, 2007 10:23:26 am Pat wrote: >> >> Do you really think that just better C++ standard compliance and >> >> "advances >> >> in optimization" >> >> really deserve the effort involved in changing the whole 6.0 thing for >> >> the >> >> 7.1?? >> >> please give me something better.... >> >> >> >> are you with the MS Vista team??? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Chris Thompson" <cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message >> >> news:200712051050.50340.cthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> >> >> > On December 5, 2007 09:41:59 am Pat wrote: >> >> >> Visual Studio 6 support being dropped???? >> >> >> >> >> >> http://trolltech.com/developer/notes/supported_platforms >> >> >> >> >> >> I do not understand why?? >> >> >> it's cheap and works very well for a lot of projects... >> >> >> >> >> >> I hope it's just a mistake... >> >> > >> >> > Visual Studio 6 has atrocious support for C++. You are doing >> >> > yourself >> >> > a >> >> > massive disservice not upgrading to at least Visual C++ .Net 2003 >> >> > aka >> >> > VC++ 7.1 (not the half-step, .Net 2002, VC++ 7.0). >> >> > >> >> > Really, Visual C++ 6.0 was released almost ten years ago. It is >> >> > well >> >> > worth >> >> > taking advantage of Microsoft's increased compliance with the C++ >> >> > standard and advances in optimisation since that time. >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> > with >> >> > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. >> >> > List archive and information: >> >> > http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ >> >> >> >> -- >> >> To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with >> >> "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. List archive and >> >> information: >> >> http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ >> > >> > >> > -- >> > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with >> > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. >> > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with >> "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. >> List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ >> >> > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ -- [ signature omitted ]
Pat wrote: > are you lecturing me on economics??? Well, I don't need that... > I'm just a Trolltech customer and I have the right to tell them my opinion > about what they are planning to do, I think if there are more people like us > they might reconsider the thing, that's it. > Pat > > In all honesty, it was a choice to either drop some seriously cool new features, or drop a massively broken compiler. Please don't flame me, it wasn't my decision, just passing on the rationale. If cost concerns you so much, grab mingw and use it, it'll still support what you want to do, on the target platform at no cost, while allowing you to keep up with the latest Qt advances. -- [ signature omitted ]
> In all honesty, it was a choice to either drop some seriously cool new > features, or drop a massively broken compiler. Please don't flame me, it > wasn't my decision, just passing on the rationale. If cost concerns you so > much, grab mingw and use it, it'll still support what you want to do, on > the target platform at no cost, while allowing you to keep up with the > latest Qt advances. > But even that wont solve the problem... Yes mingw will solve the current issue... But if he is using the current version of mingw put out today... Are you saying QT 8.4 (or where TT is) that comes out in 2019 will support the current version of todays compiler? Of course not... Every compiler has a life span.. and TT IMO has done a very good job of maintaining support for old compilers as long as possible. For instance, I used to have to use HPs native compiler, which was 10X worse then the VC 6.0 compiler. QT supported it much longer then the other "cross platform framework" we had called Mainsoft... Scott -- [ signature omitted ]
Scott Aron Bloom wrote: >Of course not... Every compiler has a life span.. and TT IMO has done a >very good job of maintaining support for old compilers as long as >possible. For instance, I used to have to use HPs native compiler, >which was 10X worse then the VC 6.0 compiler. HP-UX's aCC compiler is another in our target list. Version 3 of that compiler has serious shortcomings, but Version 6 seems mostly ok. -- [ signature omitted ]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
> well you haven't got my irony... I'm a bit tired of people trying to justify > new versions of everything just because the old one is just too old and it > looks no cool anymore! Do you think that Windows Vista was a necessary > change from XP....???? You realize that Qt is open source right? You could easily start a fork that compiles against VC6. TT may not have the time to try and fuss with it any more, but if it's something you still need/want to use, you can make all of the changes necessary to keep that going. Caleb -- [ signature omitted ]
you're changing the point, starting a fork for supporting VS 6 is not our job.... Pat "Caleb Tennis" <caleb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:54800.192.168.2.159.1196888825.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> well you haven't got my irony... I'm a bit tired of people trying to >> justify >> new versions of everything just because the old one is just too old and >> it >> looks no cool anymore! Do you think that Windows Vista was a necessary >> change from XP....???? > > You realize that Qt is open source right? You could easily start a fork > that > compiles against VC6. TT may not have the time to try and fuss with it > any more, > but if it's something you still need/want to use, you can make all of the > changes > necessary to keep that going. > > Caleb > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ -- [ signature omitted ]
> you're changing the point, > starting a fork for supporting VS 6 is not our job.... > Pat No, but it's an option, if you don't want to change compilers. Caleb -- [ signature omitted ]