On Monday 15 May 2017 14:49:19 Mårten Nordheim wrote: > 1. Why do we [not] want QStringFormatter in the library?
con: already have enough formatters in Qt, better work on those than introducing something else _again_. pro: have too many formatters in Qt, add one that can encompass and replace all of them > 2. If QStringFormatter gets implemented, what are its hard requirements? To reach the 'pro' above, imo these are essential: Strictly More Featureful - Every formatting that can be implemented with the existing tools, QStringFormatter must support too. Not Less Performant - For every formatting that can be implemented with the existing tools, QStringFormatter's version must not be slower. > 3. What are its soft requirements? Not Less Concise - For every formatting that can be implemented with the existing tools, QStringFormatter's version must not be (much more) verbose. Open For Extension - Users can add formatting for their own types (like QStringBuilder allows, but using documented API). QDateTime, etc support to be added as examples. Compile-Time Checks - Like asprintf (on GCC) and QStringBuilder, the correctness is checked at compile-time (unlike arg()). Blend In - It should interoperate with the existing formatters until such a day as it replaces them. Thanks, Marc -- Marc Mutz <[email protected]> | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company Tel: +49-30-521325470 KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
