> QByteArray a, b; > a.reserve(1000); > a = b; > > There's no way you will ever preserve the reserve(), because that would > conflict with the implicit sharing.
This is no problem since I don't do this. But I see your point. This surely limits usability of reserve(). > So in your case you use another operator=. Should that work? Well, if it does > I'm sure no one would object. But since another operator= can never hold > the reserve() promise, I don't really see the point. I agree. I still can't understand why clear() could not preserve the previously reserved space. If clear() would do so, my problems would be solved since I am using a single reserve() call to reserve the space and then calls of clear() and append() to collect the data. Does QByteArray have some kind of reserved-flag? > reserve() means you can write directly in the byte array data, and then it > works. I'd suggest that you follow this rule. You can do this by working > directly on the data() pointer. So after all I am not supposed to use clear() or operator=() after calling reserve()? That should be documented. Without that knowledge it obviously is impossible to use reserve() in a sensible way. If you don't have an idea how that could be improved on the code side I would file a suggestion about extending the documentation a bit. -- Kind Regards Bernhard Lindner _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
