On sexta-feira, 6 de julho de 2012 17.08.08, Alan Alpert wrote: > > Most c++ developers wouldn't want to choose between stability and > > performance. > > I'm adventurous, just point me at the "qt private header forum" where > > interface changes are community-driven and I'll sign up. > > I'll understand if this has to wait until after Qt5 is released.
There's a mailing list you can join that discusses the development of all Qt
internals... oh, right, this is it :-)
Welcome to the community-driven forum to discuss changes to anything.
> Private headers are not discussed in some private forum. They are subject
> to the same governance structure as the rest of Qt, except that there's
> less impetus to talk about API changes. At the end of the day interface
> changes are still driven by the people who write them and the discussions
> during code reviews. The "private" refers to the level of compatibility and
> documentation guarantees (none), not the development process. For example,
> I got the impression that most of the container refactoring that Thiago was
> discussing on this list were changes to the private implementation classes,
> not the public API.
It was. The public API for QVector, QString, QByteArray, QVariant and QList
was exactly the same.
--
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
