> From: Development <development-boun...@qt-project.org> on behalf of Thiago > Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com> > Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 6:21 PM > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] QString and related changes for Qt 6 > > On terça-feira, 12 de maio de 2020 22:57:31 PDT Jaroslaw Kobus wrote: > > That's why I've mentioned the better option: aggregation: QStringView could > > be a member of QString. However, the downside would be that every time you > > want to call a const method for QString, you would need to first get access > > to the QStringView member. The advantage is that in this way you may easily > > integrate different interfaces inside one class. > > This is more or less what we want to do. QString in Qt 6 is {begin, size, d} > and QStringView has always been {begin, size}. So, yeah, it can be done. > > The idea is indeed to offload the majority of the non-mutating methods to the > same functions, from inline code. There's no reason to have both > QString::indexOf and QStringView::indexOf entry points in the library.
Good to hear. And I hope that Marc will resurrect soon after his veto. Regards Jarek _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development