On Thursday 12 March 2015 23:22:17 Stephen Kelly wrote: > Thiago Macieira wrote: > > This was intentional and the minor SIC was expected. It only happens if > > you're calling a static function that only exists for Q_ASSERT -- not many > > people do that. > > Oops, nobody told Allen: > > https://github.com/KDAB/GammaRay/commit/44ac33d970e > > I think this affects far more code than you seem to think it affects. > > What *should* Allen do now?
Option 1: remove the #ifdef and live with warnings from the compiler that some functions are unused Option 2: option 1 + Q_DECL_UNUSED on the function Option 3: option 1 + "force" the using with Q_UNUSED or similar. > What macro works for multiple versions of Qt? > Why should everyone define such a macro themselves in their code? How about > contributing it back to qglobal.h? What would it be called? And to bring > this full circle, how about swapping the semantic of the old and new macros? > > I'm sure you considered not making the SIC change and creating a new macro > instead. Why did you decide for the SIC? Two main reasons: 1) it improves existing code, since we can get rid of some #ifdefs 2) it allows us avoid CI integration errors because no one compiled in release mode before submitting -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
