On segunda-feira, 4 de julho de 2016 08:14:21 PDT Julien Blanc wrote:
> Following Stephen Kelly’s mails, I’m convinced that instead of wrapping
> stl containers, implementing a free function qIsEmpty is less work and
> addresses all your readability concerns.
But it is uglier and does not help wit
Le samedi 02 juillet 2016 à 10:10 -0700, Thiago Macieira a écrit :
> On sábado, 2 de julho de 2016 15:44:50 PDT Mark Gaiser wrote:
> > I don't get why you would be confused by - for instance - the empty
> > method.
> > STL has that method, but so does Qt [1] apparently in an attempt to be
> > compa
On 1 July 2016 at 20:36, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Premises not under discussion:
>
> Qt source code is product and meant to be read by our users
> Qt source code must be clean and readable
>
> The above is not up for debate.
>
> For some time now, we've had a flurry of changes to
Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On sábado, 2 de julho de 2016 12:40:53 PDT Stephen Kelly wrote:
>> So, by sticking to lots of raw loops, you're actually actively excluding
>> other parts of the C++ community from participating. I don't have numbers
>> to qualify it, but there seems to me to be a much la
Thiago Macieira wrote:
> What do we do?
{
int container[1];
Q_ASSERT(!qIsEmpty(container));
}
{
std::vector container;
Q_ASSERT(qIsEmpty(container));
}
{
std::deque container;
Q_ASSERT(qIsEmpty(container));
}
{
std::list container;
Q_ASS
