> From: Joerg Bornemann <[email protected]> > On 05/03/2012 16:49, ext BRM wrote: > >> So why start a situation that could lead to that kind of interdependencies > within Qt or Qt applications? > > I wasn't proposing anything like this; was just curious. :) > I'm strictly against having a global include-all-the-stuff-of-Qt header and > I don't think anybody sees this as a feasible option.
It was primarily in response to: 1. The Gtk reference to a single header. 2. The messages at the beginning of the thread proposing the indirect header router, which is no better. I'm not saying that developers should be forced to know every include needed for a given header (e.g. QHostAddress has a QString in it so both should have to be included by whoever includes QHostAddress); but that the headers should be minimal in their inclusions - only what is necessary and nothing more. That's all. $0.02 Ben _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
