On 2016-07-01 17:56, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On sexta-feira, 1 de julho de 2016 22:13:42 PDT Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: >> Even today: where is QList::push_back(T&&)? Where are our emplacement >> functions and their try versions? Where are our exception guarantees?) > > We don't care about exceptions, so we won't be adding those. > > As for the move-versions, since we can't take move-only types in our > containers due to the implicit sharing, does it really make a difference if > we > have them or not?
Yes... and ironically, for the same reason implicit sharing is useful; because the copy ctor might be horrendously expensive. Emplacement and move-insert are (also) useful purely from a performance perspective. > I would prefer the opposite: use non-Qt only if that is better than the Qt > equivalent. If you can't prove it or if it's too small, it's not worth the > difference in readability that it creates. Option N+1: Convince the committee to adopt Qt's naming conventions and convenience API's in STL2¹ ;-). (¹ Or whatever it's being called...) -- Matthew _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
