On 21 Apr 2017, at 12:53, Konstantin Tokarev <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
21.04.2017, 13:45, "Milian Wolff" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>: On Freitag, 21. April 2017 12:10:07 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: Hi, Jedrzej asked me to raise the issue here. Rationale for both allowing, as well as for why I think the rationale for the existing ban is wrong, is included in the commit message: https://codereview.qt-project.org/192269 I for one welcome this change. I always cringed when I wrote code such as QCOMPARE(getSomeQUint64(), 0) and it would fail to compile, forcing me to write ugly code such as QCOMPARE(getSomeQUint64(), quint64(0)) I've also come across code that failed to compile some platforms, since it used something like 0l or 0ll which did not match whatever platform-specific type was used on the lhs... So, from my side a clear +1! Another case: comparing QString or QByteArray on one side with const char* literal, or with expression which returns QStringBuilder Implicit conversions from QByteArray/const char * to QString was one of the reasons we didn't want this in the past (Qt 4), as those conversions were locale dependent. That is of course less of a problem since Qt 5.0. Cheers, Lars -- Milian Wolff | [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> | Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company Tel: +49-30-521325470 KDAB - The Qt Experts , _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development -- Regards, Konstantin _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
