Thiago Macieira schreef op 25-11-2013 16:56: > On segunda-feira, 25 de novembro de 2013 13:08:04, André Somers wrote: >> Please note that this goes for *any* method that has an overload. And >> that any method that currently does not have an overload, may still get >> one in the future. If you don't want to run the risk of source >> incompatabilities in the future, I'd always use the explicit signature. > We'll pay more attention to this now that we are taking addresses to > functions. As in: we're not going to introduce any overloads to any public functions anymore? So, a hypothetical function sort() could no longer be overloaded to take an additional parameter like Qt::SortOrder that was overlooked in the first version of the API design?
André _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
