hi, i wonder why you just don't store QObject* in the lists? moving from objects to pointers should be "just" fleißarbeit ;)
alex Am Mon, 20 Jul 2015 22:18:50 +0200 schrieb "Jason H" <jh...@gmx.com>: > And the problem with PHP is that it works at all. ;-) > > Wouldn't the modifications you inquire make a mess of the implicit data > sharing? > > > > Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 1:02 PM > > From: "Gunnar Roth" <gunnar.r...@gmx.de> > > To: "Guido Seifert" <warg...@gmx.de> > > Cc: interest@qt-project.org > > Subject: Re: [Interest] Need argumentative help..... giving qobject > > copy/assignment constructor and put it in qlist/qmap > > > > Hi Guido, > > i know quite a many bad c/c++ code that worked … for a while ;-) thats the > > problem with many bad c/c++ code, that it works somehow. > > > Am 20.07.2015 um 18:53 schrieb Guido Seifert <warg...@gmx.de>: > > > > > > > > > One should think this is a clear warning sign. :-) > > > But the code worked. So problem solved. Now I am wondering if I was > > > over-cautious, or if there are less obvious problems. With different > > > compilers? Platforms? Some less known QMap/QList features, which might > > > shuffle the objects around? Not that the obvious stuff isn't enough NOT > > > to do this. > > > > > > On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 18:41:16 +0200 > > > Gunnar Roth <gunnar.r...@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> well i think thats even worse. You have to call the base class copy > > >> constructor in any derived copy constructor but you cannot as it is > > >> private ( and even not implemented), > > >> so that was not enough warning for them not to do this? > > >> > > >> > > >>> Am 20.07.2015 um 18:38 schrieb Guido Seifert <warg...@gmx.de>: > > >>> > > >>> No, they gave a class, which inherits QObject a copy/assignment > > >>> constructor. Not as bad as patching Qt, but still not a good idea. > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 18:35:08 +0200 > > >>> Gunnar Roth <gunnar.r...@gmx.de> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Hi Guido, > > >>>> you mean they have patched qt and gave Object an assignment operator > > >>>> and copy constructor? > > >>>> Really? > > >>>> > > >>>> Regards, > > >>>> Gunnar > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> Am 20.07.2015 um 14:51 schrieb Guido Seifert <warg...@gmx.de>: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Hi, just seen this in project's code. Worse, I have been told to do > > >>>>> it exactly this way in another code part. I must say I am less than > > >>>>> thrilled. On first glance this code seems to work. There is not much > > >>>>> copying around. The objects sit happily in their containers. But it > > >>>>> smells. So what is the worst what can be expected? Something not > > >>>>> obvious? On different compilers? I need some convincing reasons, > > >>>>> which cannot just waved away..... or confirmation that eveything is > > >>>>> fine and I can stop worrying.... but this also must be convincing. > > >>>>> Perhaps even more ;-) > > >>>>> -- > > >>>>> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>>> Interest mailing list > > >>>>> Interest@qt-project.org > > >>>>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > > >>>> > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Interest mailing list > > > Interest@qt-project.org > > > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Interest mailing list > > Interest@qt-project.org > > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > > > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest -- /* * The smallest worm will turn being trodden on. * -- William Shakespeare, "Henry VI" */
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
