Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Marc Mutz
On Saturday 17 October 2015 22:51:28 Bubke Marco wrote: > But before we add new concepts we should agree in which direction we want > to go. I have the feeling that we build an airplan but some want a jumbo > jet, some a jet fighter and some, lets describe it so, they want to fly > to the moon bec

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Marc Mutz
On Saturday 17 October 2015 22:42:35 Konstantin Ritt wrote: > > The whole problem of QString::fromRawData is that the method you called > > may store the QString and thus keep referencing the string you had, even > > past the > > point where your string changed. > > > > In fact, that happens with

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Saturday 17 October 2015 19:42:27 Bubke Marco wrote: > > Last time I profiled Qt Creator startup and parsing of projects, the two > > most expensive calls in QtCore were qHash and the SHA1 calculator. The > > former I've already fixed. The latter I was hoping that some colleagues > > would fix

Re: [Development] Fwd: Change in qt/qtbase[5.6]: Make the C++11 atomic support the default, if available

2015-10-17 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Sunday 18 October 2015 00:59:32 Tim Blechmann wrote: > On 17/10/15 01:27, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > FYI > > > > Please report any issues you have with broken compilers that did not > > implement std::atomic properly. I'd like to include them in the release > > notes. > > > > These are already

Re: [Development] Fwd: Change in qt/qtbase[5.6]: Make the C++11 atomic support the default, if available

2015-10-17 Thread Tim Blechmann
On 17/10/15 01:27, Thiago Macieira wrote: > FYI > > Please report any issues you have with broken compilers that did not > implement > std::atomic properly. I'd like to include them in the release notes. > > These are already known to fail, so please don't report them: > - Xcode 5.0's clang com

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Bubke Marco
On October 17, 2015 21:05:29 Marc Mutz wrote: > On Saturday 17 October 2015 15:51:35 Smith Martin wrote: >> >Please understand my POV: I am of the firm belief that Qt has no business >> >creating inefficiencies for its users by sloppy implementation. Anywhere. >> >> I think you are overreacting

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Konstantin Ritt
2015-10-17 8:58 GMT+04:00 Thiago Macieira : > On Saturday 17 October 2015 07:14:58 Konstantin Ritt wrote: > > 2015-10-17 6:23 GMT+04:00 Thiago Macieira : > > > On Saturday 17 October 2015 03:34:51 Konstantin Ritt wrote: > > > > - QString::fromRawData(u"hello world", 5) /* { d=nullptr, b=.., s=5 >

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Branislav Katreniak
> > > Non-owning QString can be created with special static QString method. It > > stays non-owning only while being passed through const &. Code that cares > > about keeping QString in view mode, must stick to const QString & all the > > time. Copy assignment on non-owning QString results in ownin

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Bubke Marco
On October 17, 2015 19:22:55 Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Saturday 17 October 2015 08:06:33 Marc Mutz wrote: >> > The word 'fanboys' disturbs me (I know you don't mean it that way) because >> > there are no 'hard' numbers on how 'bad' the current situation really is. >> > It would really be helpfu

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Marc Mutz
On Saturday 17 October 2015 15:51:35 Smith Martin wrote: > >Please understand my POV: I am of the firm belief that Qt has no business > >creating inefficiencies for its users by sloppy implementation. Anywhere. > > I think you are overreacting here, way too much. You have discovered a more > effic

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtWidgets.diff

2015-10-17 Thread Aleix Pol
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Marc Mutz wrote: > On Monday 21 September 2015 11:05:52 Knoll Lars wrote: >> QDesktopWidget::primaryScreenChanged signal >> -> IMO this should be added as NOTIFY to the corresponding property. > > The signal is missing the int argument > > int primaryScreen() >

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Saturday 17 October 2015 08:06:33 Marc Mutz wrote: > > The word 'fanboys' disturbs me (I know you don't mean it that way) because > > there are no 'hard' numbers on how 'bad' the current situation really is. > > It would really be helpful to have an idea how 'real-world' applications > > suffer

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Bubke Marco
On October 17, 2015 15:52:08 Smith Martin wrote: >>Please understand my POV: I am of the firm belief that Qt has no business >>creating inefficiencies for its users by sloppy implementation. Anywhere. > > I think you are overreacting here, way too much. You have discovered a more > efficient way

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Smith Martin
>Please understand my POV: I am of the firm belief that Qt has no business >creating inefficiencies for its users by sloppy implementation. Anywhere. I think you are overreacting here, way too much. You have discovered a more efficient way to handle strings, but that doesn't mean Trolltech create

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-17 Thread Bubke Marco
Hi Marc They thread mostly concentrated on performance but what about statical analysis? string_view and array_view are specifically designed for that. Maybe you mention it already but how is QStringView working for it. Sent from cellphone ___ Devel