> On Dec. 22, 2015, 4:59 p.m., Ivan Čukić wrote: > > The patch seems straight-forward. > > > > I can not find the reference that QRegularExpression is thread-safe (the > > most I see is 'all functions in this class are reentrant which is stated > > for QRegExp as well). > > > > The QRegExp vs QRegularExpression situation is quite confusing, but the > > later should be preferred in Qt 5.x - it is faster if nothing else. > > David Edmundson wrote: > you're right docs don't mention it, but see Alex's comment on > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126455/
It wasn't that I don't trust you on its thread safety. :) Just meant to leave it as a note for future reference if they decide to remove the 'inner mutex' during some code clean-up and optimization attempts. - Ivan ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126474/#review89939 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Dec. 22, 2015, 4:52 p.m., David Edmundson wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126474/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Dec. 22, 2015, 4:52 p.m.) > > > Review request for KDE Frameworks. > > > Repository: kio > > > Description > ------- > > A static QRegExp was used but it is not thread safe. QRegularExpression > seems to be. > > BUG: 352356 > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/urifilters/shorturi/kshorturifilter.cpp > 1af4768b7b5ab9d1f5af52f17170d466d854b9bb > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126474/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > I ran the autotests which includes urifilter and I've run krunner which uses > it extensively. > > > Thanks, > > David Edmundson > >
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel