Den tors 5 mars 2020 kl 21:24 skrev Max Paperno <ma...@wdg.us>:
>
> On 3/5/2020 3:11 PM, Elvis Stansvik wrote:
> > Den tors 5 mars 2020 kl 19:26 skrev Max Paperno <ma...@wdg.us>:
> >> One thing for sure, since my benchmarks, from here on I will very much
> >> prefer the "multiArg" version of .arg() vs. using multiple .arg()s.
> >
> > Closing side note: There's a a nice Clazy diagnostic for that.
>
> Indeed, but IIRC it only warns when using multiple strings, like
> .arg("string").arg("other"), not with, for example
> .arg("string").arg(5). Whereas it's still considerably faster (and I
> presume more "efficient") to do .arg("string", QString::fromNumber(5)).
> Even just a single .arg(QString::fromNumber(5)) seems a little faster
> than .arg(5).Oh right, I have the memory of a gold fish, forgetting that part of your results. Thanks for doing those benchmarks. Maybe the Clazy check could be improved following your findings. Elvis > > Best, > -Max > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
