Thiago Macieira wrote: >> But again, even if those are exchangeable, why is QUrlQuery better? As far >> as I can tell I'd be using that class or QUrl to construct something that's >> not an URL. > > Because you're encoding something that is part of a URL's query. It's the same > encoding.
I was indeed thinking that there'd be an advantage if one could put the URL and the POST data in a single QUrlQuery instance, which could then be handed to QNAM::post(). Those 7 lines are evidently more readable, but maybe that argument is moot if you have to configure the server with an equivalent (or the same) cryptic string (don't know, never had anything to do with that kind of thing). > Ok, now try setting a password that contains "&p=". I can't, not my server (but I think I get your point) :) R. _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
