On Sonntag, 19. April 2020 14:39:40 CEST André Pönitz wrote: > On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 02:21:39PM +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > > > I don't think we need "incomparable" here. > > > > > > QVariant(TypeA) and QVariant(TypeB) can be ordered for different TypeA > > > and > > > TypeB based e.g. on alphabetical order of their .typeName(). > > > > > > If wanted, this can be refined to make e.g. all integral types > > > comparable. > > > > What about non-integral types? > > They are compared by typeName(). So any QChar would be less-than any > QRegularExpression. > > > QVariants can't really be anything but weakly ordered as I see it, > > as some of the things it contains are either non- comparable or > > weakly ordered themselves. > > On the inner level the situation is up to the actual type, that's no > different than today, and would also not be affected by disallowing > comparisons between different types. > Yes, but in C++20 terms the comparison operators still need to return types of https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/compare/partial_ordering[1]
But all that really isn't possible before C++20 as I see it. 'Allan -------- [1] https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/compare/partial_ordering
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
