On 25.05.2017 13:53, André Somers wrote:
Op 25/05/2017 om 12:38 schreef Konstantin Tokarev:
Other problem, that IMO is more serious, is that Qt *requires* user to use
QList,
by returning or taking it as and argument in various places. That's almost only
reason why I use QList in my code[*].
If Qt 6 APIs are changed from QList to QVector, lots of user code dealing with
this APIs will break, unless QList will become an alias of QVector.
[*] And, fwiw, almost only reason I use QString, but that's off-topic here
I think you bring up a good point there. Would not the best way out be
to fix exactly this problem? If these functions would not return a
container, but some type of view into such a container, that would leave
users free to choose the type of container they need for their job
instead of being forced into the direction Qt choose for its API. A view
might take the form of a pair of iterators, a range, or perhaps even
some specialized class that basicaly wraps a pair or iterators and that
provides convenience functions to/from the Qt containers.
If you only return a view to the container, then if the container is
modified, the return value is no longer valid. Returning a full
container (referenced, with copy-on-write semantics) will not have this
problem.
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
