On Dienstag, 19. Januar 2016 13:40:39 CET Uwe Rathmann wrote: > On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 08:39:02 +0000, Knoll Lars wrote: > > The main question IMO is how we can bring these two worlds closer > > together for Qt 6 (or maybe even to some extent in Qt 5.x). > > Why - ending up with an inconsistent and undecided API ? > > To me the API design is the most valuable asset of the Qt classes. To > make it worse because of corner case performance consideration, or to > make some of your developers happy - sounds just wrong to me. > > >From my point of view ( being an application developer ) the most > > important thing is, that I can make APIs like: > > - Vector<QPointF> interpolated( const Vector<QPointF> & ) > > because it leads to more readable code than: > > - void interpolated( const Vector<QPointF> &in, Vector<QPointF> &out ).
With C++11 move semantics, you can, and should, do the first options even for large vectors, also if Vector == std::vector. So this point is moot. -- Milian Wolff | milian.wo...@kdab.com | Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company Tel: +49-30-521325470 KDAB - The Qt Experts
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
