ossi added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS
> dfaure wrote in fdsender.cpp:24 > In that case I don't understand why SocketAddress takes a QByteArray and not > a std::string.... Because ossi suggested it to unify the API and avoid one > conversion to std::string in fdereceiver? But then we have two contradictory > goals, we need to decide whether we use Qt or not in fdsender and therefore > in SocketAddress. Since one is not supposed to use Qt API without a > QCoreApplication instance, and since it's not recommented to run Qt code as > root, I think your original idea made sense, no Qt in fdsender nor in > SocketAddress. i can get behind the idea of keeping SocketAddress and FdSender qt-free. it's ugly that FdReceiver stands out, but it would be way harder to make that one qt-free due to its use of the event loop. REPOSITORY R241 KIO REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D10273 To: chinmoyr, #frameworks, dfaure Cc: ossi, thiago, dfaure, michaelh
