On Monday, 1 April 2019 12:41:59 CEST Vasily Pupkin wrote: > > is too fragile and not compatible enough with standards. I recommend you > > reconsider and think about a more standard format. > > Just wanted to clarify, that I am working on a solution, which is totaly > different from datastream serialization (and opposes it) and is format > agnostic. It has an abstract module, which can be implemented for XML, JSON > and so on. > The API would be QByteArray serialize(const QVariant& value), and QVariant > might be a gadget or a collection of any depth. The only thing it does, is > peaking inside QVariant and recursively (de)serializes properties or items.
My first reaction is that I don't like it. We already have too many of those and we've had proposals for such API before. But I'm not going to stop you. Make a proof of concept and we may be able to discuss. Worst case is that we don't add it to QtCore, but it gets released elsewhere. > > Nor I. That code is black magic to me and I don't touch it. > > Is it going to be left like that forever :( ? Yes, unless someone steps up and maintains it. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel System Software Products _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
