On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 05:08:33PM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > > Allowing _both_ I have not seen actively endorsed by anyone, > > this only makes a messy incosnsistent API. > > I would allow both. It is the only way to remain source > compatible, while making it possible for those that wish to, to > follow the so-called Core guidelines for C++.
I'll rather have a uniform API than to have latest bells and whistles in some random places. It's like putting chromium coating on the wheel covers of your trusty oxcart. Sure, one can do that, but it's not exactly solving a problem. As Volker already noticed, it's not the "odd" QObject ownership model that cause problems in practice, if at all it's the few cases where it is unclear whether it applies. Having said that, there might be some middle ground. E.g. for large subsystem like QtWebEngine that differ for valid technical reasons from the core offering anyway, having mildly different API style might be ok. Andre' _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
