On Sunday, 24 November 2019 13:02:32 PST Olivier Goffart wrote:
> > OMG, are you really sure about these massive changes?
>
> Not 100% sure, no.
> What specific changes are you worried about?
> In this case, I believe the changes should lead to only small behavior
> changes which are in fact fixes
On Sunday, 24 November 2019 09:57:56 PST Olivier Goffart wrote:
> Adding a cast function does not sound like a bad idea? But should it be
> done in Qt5.15 or Qt6. And should it return T or optional (in case the
> conversion did not work) or have a bool*ok=nullptr parameter?
The problem with std:
On Monday, 25 November 2019 06:35:53 PST Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development
wrote:
> Il 24/11/19 18:57, Olivier Goffart ha scritto:
> > The issue is that there is lots of use of these (esp. the most common ones
> > like toString and toInt.) Removing all uses be a huge work for no obvious
> > reason
Il 24/11/19 18:57, Olivier Goffart ha scritto:
The issue is that there is lots of use of these (esp. the most common ones like
toString and toInt.) Removing all uses be a huge work for no obvious reasons.
(And i was told they are now recommended by clazy)
The reason was avoiding the template bl
> On 24. Nov 2019, at 18:57, Olivier Goffart wrote:
>
> On 24.11.19 12:36, Lars Knoll wrote:
>> Hi Olivier,
>> Thanks for looking through this and coming up with a proposal. I like the
>> direction.
>>> On 22 Nov 2019, at 14:32, Olivier Goffart wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This is a follow-up
On 24.11.19 21:53, Mathias Hasselmann wrote:
OMG, are you really sure about these massive changes?
Not 100% sure, no.
What specific changes are you worried about?
In this case, I believe the changes should lead to only small behavior changes
which are in fact fixes.
But this is of course up t
OMG, are you really sure about these massive changes?
I am pretty sure that this will introduce countless hard to catch
porting issues. After all there are no compiler warnings for this, only
subtile behavior changes and I doubt that all the Qt based projects out
there have sufficient test cov
On 24.11.19 12:36, Lars Knoll wrote:
Hi Olivier,
Thanks for looking through this and coming up with a proposal. I like the
direction.
On 22 Nov 2019, at 14:32, Olivier Goffart wrote:
Hi,
This is a follow-up on what was discussed in the (second part of the) QtCore
session in the QtCS.
Lars
Hi Olivier,
Thanks for looking through this and coming up with a proposal. I like the
direction.
> On 22 Nov 2019, at 14:32, Olivier Goffart wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This is a follow-up on what was discussed in the (second part of the) QtCore
> session in the QtCS.
> Lars and others have been ment
Hi,
This is a follow-up on what was discussed in the (second part of the) QtCore
session in the QtCS.
Lars and others have been mentioning that they dislike implicit conversions
within QVariant. Creating a new class (QAny) has been suggested, that would be
like QVariant but without the convers
10 matches
Mail list logo
