I have taken some interest in EBN, the KDE
> >> > static
> >> > code checker[1]. One of the categories there is "Check for Qt classes
> >> > that
> >> > should not be used" where it recommends to use e.g. KTabBar instead of
> >> &g
On Saturday 23 February 2013 Feb, Sven Langkamp wrote:
> Looks like Inge and I did contacted him independently. He mentioned
> that it's still a long time till KDE Frameworks and that the checks
> are still valid for consistency reasons.
> In my opinion the visual difference is almost invisible an
e checker[1]. One of the categories there is "Check for Qt classes
>> > that
>> > should not be used" where it recommends to use e.g. KTabBar instead of
>> > QTabBar
>> > and so on.
>> >
>> > What's our opinion on that? That
2013/2/20 Sven Langkamp
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Inge Wallin wrote:
> > As you may have noticed, I have taken some interest in EBN, the KDE
> static
> > code checker[1]. One of the categories there is "Check for Qt classes
> that
> > should not be used
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Inge Wallin wrote:
> As you may have noticed, I have taken some interest in EBN, the KDE static
> code checker[1]. One of the categories there is "Check for Qt classes that
> should not be used" where it recommends to use e.g. KTabBar instead
As you may have noticed, I have taken some interest in EBN, the KDE static
code checker[1]. One of the categories there is "Check for Qt classes that
should not be used" where it recommends to use e.g. KTabBar instead of QTabBar
and so on.
What's our opinion on that? That shou
