On Tuesday 3 September 2024 17:34:20 CEST Marc Mutz via Development wrote:
> I'm really doubting the wisdom of adding another dimension of build to
> Qt. We already have release/debug, and Q_NARROW_CONTRACT_NOEXCEPT would
> mean an orthogonal build mode. So on Windows we'd need four builds per
> co
Hi,
The class-level export macro used to be a trigger for syncqt to generate
a forwarding QClass header, so every public class had them in the past,
and we have a rich history of exported classes.
That's not a case at least since Qt 6 times. syncqt don't consider export macro
as a trigger.
syncqt
Hi,
TL;DR: Never export non-polymorphic classes at class-level and always
define destructors of polymorphic classes, and define them out-of-line.
The class-level export macro used to be a trigger for syncqt to generate
a forwarding QClass header, so every public class had them in the past,
an
