On Friday, 4 de November de 2011 10:15:54 André Somers wrote: > The more I think about it, the more I think it is important to fix this: > who is responsible for the lifetime of the QDnsReply object? > > This API does not make that clear. I like the pattern in itself (also in > QNAM), but I do think it would be an improvement if we were to use a shared > pointer to the reply object. That at least makes clear who has ownership of > the object, and prevents memory leaks when people don't realize they are > supposed to delete the object.
Maybe we should pattern this class against something that is already known: http://doc.qt.nokia.com/latest/q3dns.html This class is both the request and the reply and its ownership is clearly known. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center Intel Sweden AB - Registration Number: 556189-6027 Knarrarnäsgatan 15, 164 40 Kista, Stockholm, Sweden
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
