Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Switching iterator type to auto #3

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Switching iterator type to auto #3

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

waffle2k
Copy link
Contributor

No effective change, simply changing some of the type declarations to "auto" in the test file

@ekg
Copy link
Owner

ekg commented Jan 4, 2015

I've just begun using auto myself in another project, and it's great. I'd love to pull it in here, but I'm worried that there are still a lot of projects that might be stuck in previous C++99. What do you think?

@thomas-riccardi
Copy link

I am one of the users of intervaltree on C++99.
Branching for C++99 maintenance and going forward on master with C++11/14 would not be an issue for me, and since not much happens on this lib, the maintenance burden wound not be much.

@scchess
Copy link

scchess commented Dec 22, 2015

Me two. I'm using C++11 as well.

@sliedes
Copy link

sliedes commented Apr 17, 2016

FWIW, it won't compile as C++99 anyway because of at least unique_ptr. Not that I would want it to, but if you use unique_ptr, there's probably no reason to not use auto.

@ekg
Copy link
Owner

ekg commented Apr 17, 2016

Cool looks like we should switch.

On Sun, Apr 17, 2016, 21:28 Sami Liedes [email protected] wrote:

FWIW, it won't compile as C++99 anyway because of at least unique_ptr. Not
that I would want it to, but if you use unique_ptr, there's probably no
reason to not use auto.


You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#3 (comment)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants