On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 13:56 +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> What the code is attempting to do is provide its own "nullptr" if it isn't
> being provided as part of the language:
>
> ------------------------------
> #if __has_feature(cxx_nullptr) || (GCC_VERSION_AT_LEAST(4, 6, 0) &&
> defined(__GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__)) || (defined(_MSC_VER) && _MSC_VER >=
> 1600 && !COMPILER(INTEL))
>
> #define HAVE_NULLPTR 1
>
> #else
>
> namespace std {
> class nullptr_t { };
> }
>
> extern std::nullptr_t nullptr;
>
> #endif
> ------------------------------
>
> gcc 4.6 is preempting this and complaining about the use of the identifier. I
> don't think renaming it is going to be acceptable upstream either.
Does it work if you build with -std=c++0x? If Qt is doing the above
then presumably it is at least attempting to be compatible with C++0X.
p.
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
