On quinta-feira, 5 de julho de 2012 11.40.04, Laszlo Papp wrote: > > No, we're not. I asked if the classes were enough and the answer I > > received > > was that they aren't. > > I believe, I am not following you. It is enough for my case as of now, > but if that is blocked into QtCore for whatever reasons, and if there > is a need for more in the same module like Uwe requested, we would > still need a new module either way, anyway. > > In addition, I find QPointF3D important as well. Perhaps at least that > class along with QPointF in QtCore, or not even that?
I understand it's useful for you, but other people who might use the
functionality said it isn't and they'd need more. That means I've got a single
use-case to consider (yours) and I'm not convinced that this is worth the
moving.
So, unless new data comes, my decision is that those classes don't go into
QtCore.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
Intel Sweden AB - Registration Number: 556189-6027
Knarrarnäsgatan 15, 164 40 Kista, Stockholm, Sweden
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
