On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 01:28:18PM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Monday 09 February 2015 22:10:09 André Pönitz wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 12:58:45PM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > > On Monday 09 February 2015 21:21:12 André Pönitz wrote: > > > > I don't think the argument of whitespace changes making the history > > > > hard to read carries a lot of weight in a git world. > > > > > > Whitespaces can be ignored in git diff and git blame. > > > > This sounds a bit like 'whitespace changes in passing are Mostly > > Harmless'. Which I happen to be fine with. > > > > > You can't do that with C++ keywords. > > > > Would that be an argument against replacing '= 0' by '= Q_NULLPTR' > > under the 'fix whitespace in passing' rule? > > That was the original proposal I sent. But some people objected to it. > > I think we need to at the very least modernise our headers, since some > users may compile we strict warning options.
I think there is room for a not too contended resolution along the lines of "do whatever you think that's needed in the headers as long as there won't be a Q_NULLPTR replacing a valid '0' in a .cpp file." Andre' _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
