On 14.06.23 08:33, Marc Mutz via Development wrote:
Two more data points:
It doesn't matter whether I write Q_FOO_EXPORT [[nodiscard]] or
[[nodicard]] Q_FOO_EXPORT, I always get an error on some compiler.
So compilers don't like class-level [[nodiscard]] in conjunction with an
export macro. This is fodder for both my claims that a) non-polymophic
classes should not be exported wholesale and b) class-level
[[nodiscard]] is not a good idea.
In fact, I have yet to see a convincing user-case for class-level
[[nodiscard]], apart from the usual error_code example.
P1771 suggests to mark only those ctors [[nodiscard]] that allocate
resources (in the widest possible sense). That is a narrower rule that
"all ctors". Depends a bit on how compilers interpret the semantics. We
have one CI log¹ where GCC 10.3 apparently warns about a discarded value in
QDebugSaver saver(d);
That would be a fatal false-positive. The same compiler seems to be
warning about QScopedPointer
QScopedPointer ptr(QThread::create(~~~));
~~~use ptr~~~
and I have not been able to reproduce the issue with my GCC 10.3
(but I have a different Linux distribution version).
¹
https://testresults.qt.io/logs/qt/qtbase/c35764f80a73271dc0a795260652a8405def6e88/LinuxUbuntu_22_04x86_64LinuxQEMUarmv7GCCqtci-linux-Ubuntu-22.04-x86_64-51-0f3b05Sccache_UseConfigure/3389fd97c7323d93c525d93a93b1346f06b53d0a/build_1691805008/log.txt.gz
I'll be holding my patches in topic:nodiscard-ctor until we have come up
with a set of rules for [[nodiscard]].
Thanks,
Marc
--
Marc Mutz <marc.m...@qt.io>
Principal Software Engineer
The Qt Company
Erich-Thilo-Str. 10 12489
Berlin, Germany
www.qt.io
Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Jouni Lintunen
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin,
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg,
HRB 144331 B
--
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
