> On 2 Jul 2020, at 19:07, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, 2 July 2020 03:57:08 PDT Tor Arne Vestbø wrote: >> Which does not match the documented behavior, so I think a revert makes >> sense to avoid the surprising behavior change. > > Thanks for the opinion, Tor Arne. For the record, revert permanently or > revert > only in 5.15?
I think I prefer permanently, and then clearly documenting that the fallback conversion to a string for non-listed types may be lossy, teaching the user to either encode the data into one of the well defined and non-lossy types (e.g. use a QString if what you're representing is a string, or base64-encode raw binary data), or use CBOR instead. That leaves less amount of surprises when upgrading to Qt 6 while being clear about the possible downsides. Cheers, Tor Arne _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
