On 15 February 2012 22:56, Sean Harmer <s...@theharmers.co.uk> wrote: > On 15/02/2012 11:53, andre.poen...@nokia.com wrote: >> Anyway. It's probably better to go for any kind of uniformity. If that's >> single precision, it should be made clear that QPolygonF/QRectF are not >> meant for applications needing "polygons" in general. Maybe one should >> consider adding some QPolygonD/QRectD/... later to get the functionality >> back. Until these exist, it might be worthwhile to keep the (then >> unconditional) typedef though, to allow easy creation of custom builds of Qt >> with double precision coordinates. > > Why not make these classes into templates and have typedefs for the > float and double cases? It always confused me why QVector<n>D mixed > qreals and floats.
I agree, although typedefs will unfortunately break all forward declarations... -- Giuseppe D'Angelo _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
