On quinta-feira, 7 de junho de 2012 11.52.34, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > I disagree. > > you need to provide arguments which refute my "it only makes things > worse" stance. > > > Maybe you'll want to revert this then: > > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,22854 > > indeed
My argument is the above change: it makes sense to me. And because I do not
accept the argument that the command-line should have its own encoding. On
Unix, it's raw 8-bit C strings.
Imagine a Qt application run from the command-line with:
qtapp *
In that directory there is a file name with broken encoding. The shell will not
recode (which is why I don't by the command-line encoding argument). The Qt
application should be expected to work and interpret it that argument
properly.
If we do this for the input (the command-line to this application), we need to
do it to the output too (the command-line to other applications). E.g.:
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
QCoreApplication app(argc, argv);
QProcess proc;
proc.start("otherapp", app.arguments());
return proc.waitForFinished() ? proc.exitCode() : 1;
}
If app.arguments() contains escaped QStrings, then QProcess must unescape them
when calling out to other applications.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
Intel Sweden AB - Registration Number: 556189-6027
Knarrarnäsgatan 15, 164 40 Kista, Stockholm, Sweden
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
