> That still means there's a bug. Either his first code shouldn't compile, > or it should work. That it compiles and runs but fails seems like the > worst possible.
Yes and no. There is probably much more potential C++ code, which compiles, runs, but fails than there is correct code. Would be great if this wasn't the case. ;-) Nevertheless, I opened a bug report. Maybe the change was unintentional. I think my version could be a nice shorthand for the correct version. And if it was intentional maybe a boolean return value could be added to bindValue, which indicates correct value binding. Making it not compiling might be a bit difficult, since from a C++ point of view it is syntactically correct code. Guido -- Guido Seifert <warg...@gmx.de> _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
