On Thursday, 3 November 2022 02:40:51 PDT Marc Mutz via Development wrote: > This would be much easier done with an ABI break, but we have the tools > (QT_REMOVED_SINCE) now to deal with this already now. > > If we also make all these operators hidden friends > (https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-87973), then we at the same time > improve the user experience by removing overly-verbose error messages > when something goes wrong. If we do this, though, some incidental > comparisons that rely on implicit conversions will stop working. This is > a good thing, IMO, because it forces us to provide (and therefore > document) these operators explicitly. > > The process will also force us to (at least mentally) assign level > numbers to heterogeneously-comparable classes. This might run into > problems (such as QTBUG-108136), but is overall a good thing. > > Opinions? Comments?
This one is also a nice improvement and I'd welcome it, but the devil will be in the details because of QT_REMOVED_SINCE. For some classes, we could postpone changing anything until C++20 is required. Meanwhile, we have qcompare.h. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Cloud Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development