On Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2023 19:40:18 CEST Marc Mutz via Development wrote: > On 03.05.23 19:22, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 09:40:42 PDT Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development wrote: > >> To me it's a no brainer: any new enumeration > >> > >> added to Qt shall be an enum class. > > > > I'd say that any new enumeration in the Qt namespace should be enum class, > > but enums in classes may not be so if they're sufficiently descriptive > > already. > That's the wording we currently have, and I have two problems with that: > > - it's subjective, which means we get to quarrel over every class-scope > enum anew > - it completely ignores the point that scoped enums don't implicitly > convert to underlying_type, which is a very welcome subtraction from > C/C++'s infamous implicit conversion mess > > So if it's a vote: +1 for all new enums being scoped and +1 for all old > enums being made scoped come Qt 7. > I am not sure I want the name scope in all cases QEvent::Timer is descriptive enough, and would be improved by being QEvent::Type::Timer. With new classes in Qt6, I have generally preferred using scoped enums, but found several instances were it didn't make sense. For instance using QColorSpace::SRgb and QColorSpace::AdobeRgb for predefined color-spaces, where all other enums in QColorSpace are scoped.
Wasn't there a new C++ proposal for decoupling the two separate features of enum class? Best regards Allan -- Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
