Иван Комиссаров
> 31 июля 2018 г., в 21:39, Konstantin Tokarev <annu...@yandex.ru> написал(а): > > > > 31.07.2018, 21:35, "Иван Комиссаров" <abba...@gmail.com>: >> I prefer the solution from the thread "unique_ptr and Qt" about using smart >> pointers for transferring ownership explicitly. We can use std::observer_ptr >> from c++20 to indicate the places that do not take ownership. >> I think, using gsl::owner is a wrong way of doing things, it's the way that >> can be source and (maybe) binary compatible, but that's a workaround, not a >> solution. > > It's binary compatible, because owner<T> = T. It's not a solution, just > annotation for people static analyzers (like e.g. "emit" keyword in Qt) > >> However, the solution can require too much work to do. > > It also requires changic public APIs, which can only be done in Qt 6. > That's why we discussing that right now, not after the qt6 will be released:) >> >> Иван Комиссаров >> >>> 31 июля 2018 г., в 16:04, Eric Lemanisser <eric.lemaniss...@gmail.com> >>> написал(а): >>> >>> Please, don't introduce another type alias. It would loose the advantage of >>> static analysis like >>> http://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/cppcoreguidelines-owning-memory.html >>> >>>> Le mar. 31 juil. 2018 à 14:52, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development >>>> <development@qt-project.org> a écrit : >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>>> On 31/07/18 13:11, Sérgio Martins via Development wrote: >>>>> I would recommend however that our docs show T* instead of gsl::owner<T> >>>>> and continue to include "Takes ownership of foo" in the text. >>>>> While I believe in self-documenting signatures I think it's too much >>>>> noise and hurts readability, and most devs never heard of gsl. >>>>> >>>>> Should be just an aid for tooling IMO. >>>> >>>> I agree with the rest of your email, but I kind of disagree with this >>>> particular point, for different reasons: >>>> >>>> * Because we need to educate our users that there's more C++ than Qt out >>>> there, and the Core Guidelines and the GSL are a fundamental part of >>>> knowledge for a C++ developer. >>>> >>>> * Even if we consider talking about the GSL too much of a "distraction" >>>> in the docs, we can simply add our own qOwner type alias, with identical >>>> semantics, and document what it does and what it means in signatures. >>>> >>>> * Leaving gsl::owner in the signature of a function documentation can >>>> help clarify situations where the textual documentation does not say >>>> anything about the ownership. At least, it's one more safeguard against >>>> adding functions that take/return pointers and don't clearly document >>>> the ownership. >>>> >>>> However, from a practical point of view, unless someone adds gsl::owner >>>> _everywhere_ to Qt, we can't report it in the docs, as they would >>>> otherwise be inconsistent :-( >>>> >>>> My 2 c, >>>> -- >>>> Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer >>>> KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company >>>> Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com >>>> KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Development mailing list >>>> Development@qt-project.org >>>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Development mailing list >>> Development@qt-project.org >>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development >> , >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Development mailing list >> Development@qt-project.org >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > > > -- > Regards, > Konstantin _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
