On quarta-feira, 7 de agosto de 2013 19:29:03, Knoll Lars wrote: > But we can't (or rather should't) go for a least common denominator > approach neither. A public QCollator won't mean a non working QtCore even > if it has to fall back to unicode sort order on some OSes. And with ICU in > place it'll all work fine. > > I agree that ICU is a large dependency, but we can't simply leave out > important features forever because of this neither. and collation is > something we have been lacking for far too long.
I understand, but we don't have the collation code in QtCore either. Making QCollator public, in QtCore, before we even have a strawman implementation to prove that it can be done is very risky. We might end up with a failed non-ICU implementation, which in turn means ICU becomes a hard dependency on *all* platforms. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
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
