> On 18 Sep 2023, at 14:46, Marc Mutz via Development > <development@qt-project.org> wrote: > > TL;DR: "a" must not be a name of an existing function in Qt. > > On 18.09.23 10:15, Ivan Solovev via Development wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> 1. an ADL-able calling convention: `using std::swap; swap(lhs, rhs);` >>> 2. an implementation for built-in types: `std::swap` >>> 3. an implementation for user-defined types: ADL `swap` >>> 4. (optionally) a convenience wrapper: `std::ranges::swap()`, `qSwap` >> >> One more question here - do we want our users to be able to do (1), or >> is it enough to expose only (4) to them? >> The reason for my question is (again) naming, see below.
[…] >> Anyway, it would be great to come to some kind of consensus about the >> naming of the APIs, and move on to the actual implementation. > > +1 My take from this is that it’s next to impossible to reconcile the technical arguments for an unused (even if ugly) function name with having a good public API for our types. Not adding named public functions that are equivalent to C++20’s spaceship operator makes the problem less complex, but also reduces the value of doing the work to the point where it’s not worth it until we require C++20. What Thiago wrote makes sense to me: > On 31 Jul 2023, at 17:23, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote: > I'm not saying we have to. I'm saying that we should provide as API for our > comparable types: > * compare() > * equals() > * operators > > Whether the implementation of the latter uses the former two directly is to > be > seen. Separating the implementation from the public API seems to me the only way to end up with a clean public API, while at the same time have a macro-friendly convention. The implementation can live in a private function with a name not suitable for a public API, e.g. “qt_equals/qt_compare”; those can be used by the macro declaring the operators. Types for which we then want public APIs as well (and I agree that it’s strongly preferable to have this for all relevant types in the long run) can declare public equals()/compare() functions that ideally use the private functions. I do not see the need for adding more qOperator type global functions. Volker -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
