On Wednesday, 9 September 2020 06:38:01 PDT Andrei Golubev wrote:
> > I don't understand what this means. Am I supposed to reserve a
> > container to its current size before erasing elements
> > from it, if I don't want the erase to shrink it?
> Yes.
If we implement this behaviour.
That's the
On Wednesday, 9 September 2020 02:17:52 PDT Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development
wrote:
> > *- except when detach is necessary or shrinking happens
>
> This is another against automatic shrinking; it may invalidate
> everything rather than just the erased area. I don't understand the
> "detach"
I don't understand what this means. Am I supposed to reserve a
container to its current size before erasing elements
from it, if I don't want the erase to shrink it?
Yes.
--
Best Regards,
Andrei
From: Ville Voutilainen
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 4:20 PM
On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 at 11:58, Andrei Golubev wrote:
> On the other hand, "please do not free memory, I still need it" use-case is
> also justified. However, chances are that when you really need a certain
> memory to be allocated/preserved, there is a call to QList::reserve() prior
> to
On Mittwoch, 9. September 2020 10:17:25 CEST Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 9. September 2020 09:14:29 CEST Lars Knoll wrote:
> > Hi Allan,
> >
> > On 7 Sep 2020, at 12:59, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
> > mailto:k...@carewolf.com>> wrote:
> >
> > On Mittwoch, 26. August 2020 08:46:41 CEST
This is another against automatic shrinking; it may invalidate
everything rather than just the erased area. I don't understand the
"detach" part, is it about holding references across a detach, so they
refer to the original container, not the detached one? That's not
different from we always had,
On 09/09/2020 10:55, Andrei Golubev wrote:
Small update on QList::erase: the iterator invalidation model will be
aligned with std::vector's erase (in progress of merging the change to
dev and it got approved already). This means that, when erasing, only
the iterators that correspond to erased
Hello,
Small update on QList::erase: the iterator invalidation model will be aligned
with std::vector's erase (in progress of merging the change to dev and it got
approved already). This means that, when erasing, only the iterators that
correspond to erased elements and elements after them
On Mittwoch, 9. September 2020 09:14:29 CEST Lars Knoll wrote:
> Hi Allan,
>
> On 7 Sep 2020, at 12:59, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
> mailto:k...@carewolf.com>> wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 26. August 2020 08:46:41 CEST Lars Knoll wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is just a gentle reminder that feature freeze for
+1. Going through the open bugs under 'Examples and Demos', it was clear that
out of 149 items, only two fell clearly within the realm of documentation or
documentation infrastructure, and all were better off with a specific module or
area as a component. There's also the risk of critical
Hi Allan,
On 7 Sep 2020, at 12:59, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
mailto:k...@carewolf.com>> wrote:
On Mittwoch, 26. August 2020 08:46:41 CEST Lars Knoll wrote:
Hi all,
This is just a gentle reminder that feature freeze for Qt 6 is approaching
very quickly now. We’ve had a round of checks inside the Qt
11 matches
Mail list logo
