> On 2010-07-03 22:44:14, David Faure wrote:
> > I was initially against this kind of thing (too many problems with
> > "intelligent" destructors), this is why it hasn't been done before.
> > But after long consideration, I think this one is safe and, as you say,
> > somewhat expected by users
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 13:25, David Faure wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 October 2010, Parker Coates wrote:
>> But I just don't think wrapping every
>> single literal with a constructor or conversion function is improving
>> code quality. [2]
>
> Right. In the code you linked to, it's apparent that
> 1
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://svn.reviewboard.kde.org/r/4320/
---
(Updated 2010-11-14 22:48:05.104411)
Review request for kdelibs, Raphael Kub
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://svn.reviewboard.kde.org/r/4320/
---
(Updated 2010-11-14 22:47:28.342220)
Review request for kdelibs, Raphael Kub
On Wednesday 06 October 2010, Parker Coates wrote:
> But I just don't think wrapping every
> single literal with a constructor or conversion function is improving
> code quality. [2]
Right. In the code you linked to, it's apparent that
1) KIcon is almost always used with a const char* litteral as
