On Sunday 03 July 2016 12:04:14 Stephen Kelly wrote: > It is not possible to reason about code like that. I have the feeling that > faced with code like that, people just don't attempt to reason about it > while at the same time trying to get on with what they are trying to do.
The underlying theme here, I think, is: idiomatic code. Qt has its set of idioms (like ending QObject subclass ctors in QObject *parent=nullptr), but it largely ignores C++ idioms. And that leads to complicated code and throws off contributors that are used to idiomatic C++. Take this example: https://codereview.qt-project.org/159693 The copy-swap idiom is two decades old (at least as old as Effective C++ ed. 1), but the only uses in Qt are those that I introduced myself. Following the idiom trivialises the implementation of both copy and move assignment operators. Not following it leads to bugs such as the one linked above. Using algorithms is idiomatic. too: erase-remove is an idiom, also nearing two decades old. It reduces bugs, and helps grok the code for those that know the idioms, but, like in any other language, if you don't know the idioms, you don't really understand the language. C++ is the language Qt is written in. You need to learn the language's idioms. -- Marc Mutz <marc.m...@kdab.com> | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company Tel: +49-30-521325470 KDAB - Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
