2012/1/15 Giuseppe D'Angelo <dange...@gmail.com>: > 2012/1/15 Gábor Lehel <illiss...@gmail.com>: >> 2012/1/7 Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: >>> On Saturday, 7 de January de 2012 01.03.50, David Faure wrote: >>>> Shouldn't we clean that up for Qt5 and just use a bool for the contains >>>> method again? The Qt4 API ensures that nobody still has if (contains()==2) >>>> in their code anyway. >>> >>> I think it should be gone. >>> >>> For the few methods where a boolean is needed and arithmetic is wrong, the >>> suggestion is to use the RestrictedBool solution: >>> >>> typedef int ClassName:: *RestrictedBool; >> >> Apologies for the off-topic: >> >> Is the RestrictedBool technique documented anywhere? What it does, how >> it works, why it works? I can see that it's using a member pointer to >> simulate a bool (presumably to avoid implicit casts to int and such), >> but not why this is preferable to a void* (fewer operations >> permitted?), and in particular why it has to be a pointer to a member >> of the specific class it is being used for instead of some >> globally-defined dummy class (even fewer operations permitted? but >> which ones?). Googling found nothing except the existing usage in >> QSharedPointer. > > See f.i. http://www.artima.com/cppsource/safebool.html
Thanks! > > Cheers, > -- > Giuseppe D'Angelo _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
