Hi
On 24.04.2020 08:57, Joerg Bornemann wrote:
On 4/23/20 15:52, Thiago Macieira wrote:
Proposed:
template <typename T> using QVector = QList<T>; // mark deprecated
template <typename T> class QList { $(implementation to be
moved); }
Proposal 2:
template <typename T> class QList { $(implementation to be moved); }
template <typename T> using QVector = QList<T>;
no deprecation.
+1 for proposal 2.
Alternatively, proposal 3 (aka "do almost nothing"):
template <typename T> class QVector { implementation }
template <typename T> using QList = QVector<T>;
No deprecation of QVector.
No replacement of QList with QVector in our API.
Rationale: QList is our default sequential container, and in Qt6 we just
change its implementation.
The "people have been told many times to not use QList" argument can be
countered with "this has been fixed in Qt6".
The "vector is a silly name from a mathematical standpoint" argument is
valid, but vector is an established term in C++ world. Sorry, that ship
has sailed.
I am also in favor of proposal 2 or 3. I think deprecating either QList
or QVector without any big advantage for the user will just make porting
form Qt5 to Qt6 needlessly harder.
Even inside Qt we are struggling to keep up with deprecation warnings
(Thanks to Friedemann for fixing these). I am pretty sure Creator does
have the same "problem". Extrapolating that from "just us" to the
broader audience we are hopefully targetting, it looks like lots of
users/applications will be hit by these warnings and it will mean (lots
of?) work for them.
Cheers,
Olli
Cheers,
Joerg
_______________________________________________
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
