> What would you then name a Qt counterpart of std::unique_ptr, considering that
> QScopedPointer is not such a counterpart?
I'd suggest QUniquePointer. Honestly, I don't think we have too many
alternatives here. We can try Rust-like naming (something like QBox), but it
just looks weird and tells nothing about ownership semantics.
After that we can write "using QScopedPointer = QUniquePointer" for people who
get used to old scoped pointer and want to highlight the fact that a resource
will be released at the end of the scope. But personally I think we don't need
to have one more entity without a real reason to do that.
On 31/01/2020, 21:07, "Development on behalf of Ville Voutilainen"
<development-boun...@qt-project.org on behalf of ville.voutilai...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 at 21:23, Alberto Mardegan
<ma...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>
> Old man here:
>
> On 31/01/20 13:07, Vitaly Fanaskov wrote:
> > But how to use them in the API and which way is preferable is still
> > unclear. There are two main options we have:
> >
> > 1) Use std::* smart pointers as-is.
> >
> > 2) Add Qt-style wrappers around std::* smart pointers and move old
> > implementations of Qt smart pointers to the Qt5Compact module.
>
> 2.
>
> I still have trouble understanding why std::unique_ptr is called like
> this, whereas I could immediately understand what QScopedPointer does
> even before reading its documentation.
What would you then name a Qt counterpart of std::unique_ptr, considering
that
QScopedPointer is not such a counterpart?
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
