gnucash c++

Geert Janssens janssens-geert at
Wed Aug 6 17:16:38 EDT 2014

On Wednesday 06 August 2014 16:16:17 Aaron Laws wrote:
> I tried to follow the directions at
>, but I couldn't
> find a Bugzilla issue encapsulating the Great C++ Refactor. Should I
> create one so there is a place to put patches?
> I learned on IRC that it is generally a goal not to have C++ keywords
> in the Gnucash code base, and this patch is along those ends. I think
> I got all the C++11 keywords that would interfere with a C++11
> compile. If this is an inappropriate patch to submit, please let me
> know. After my signature, you can find the patch prepared using `git
> format-patch` (as specified in
> Also, I followed the
> advice of ("All
> development should target the *master* branch."). Please let me know
> if anything looks amiss (the amount of context, using unified diff
> format, perhaps I should be attaching instead of in-line quotation,
> etc.). Thanks!
> In Christ,

Hi Aaron,

Thank you for your patch. I haven't tested it yet but IMO the intention is correct.

As for bugzilla: you can create a new bugreport and attach your patch there. Attaching it to a 
mailing list message risks that it gets lost in the midst of the ongoing discussions. 'git format-
patch' is perfectly fine as format.

As for the "All development should target the *master* branch", we should change this. 
That's advice from the svn era. In git bugfixes should target the *maint* branch. New 
features and enhancements should target *master*.


More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list