On Friday July 20 2012, Olivier Goffart wrote: > On Thursday 19 July 2012 14:19:36 Marc Mutz wrote: > > On Wednesday July 18 2012, Olivier Goffart wrote: > > > We discussed namespaces long time ago already, and decided not to put > > > Qt in > > > a namespace. > > > The reason is that it breaks source compatibility by breaking all the > > > forward declarations. > > > > Even with inline namespaces? Then they would have failed to achieve their > > goal to hide the fact that the type is in an inline namespace. > > Yes, inline namespace won't help. > > If you do: > > class QString; > int foo(const QString &); > > It creates the symbol _Z3fooRK7QString, which is different from > _Z3fooRKN3v507QStringE.
Of course... how embarrassing.. :) > The suggested solution is, during Qt5 lifetime, introduce > forward-declaration headers that declares all the Qt types, and deprecate > the use of forward declarations. > Then in Qt6 we can finally move in a namespace. Sounds like a plan, yes. Thanks, Marc -- Marc Mutz <marc.m...@kdab.com> | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-Independent Software Solutions _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development