On Wednesday 26 October 2011 20:03:56 Robin Burchell wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Olivier Goffart <[email protected]> wrote:
> > So that class really fits into Qt. But only as a low level class
> > (that could even stay internal maybe, I still fail to see a use case for
> > it that is not covered by the convinience i suggest)
> 
> (without ever having actually read the standard to date, despite using
> it quite a lot...) Writing classes implementing DNS-SD would probably
> be a lot easier with this, for example. There are undoubtedly others.
> 
> It is low level, sure. That doesn't mean it isn't useful for people
> doing relatively low-level things.

Don't get me wrong ;-) I fully agree with that.

> I'm not against 'prettier' API
> built on top of this as convenience building blocks, but I would quite
> like the base to be there if I need it, too, without having to
> reinvent the wheel.



_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Reply via email to