On Thursday 02 August 2012 10:31:59 ext Olivier Goffart wrote: > If that's only a documentation problem, we can workaround that with some > macro magic.
Very good point. For some reason I thought we would have to hack on qdoc itself, but creative use of \fn and \internal should be enough. > Should that even go in the constructor? Maybe QImage::setColorProfile. The problem with that is that it is not clear from the name whether it converts the image data to the new profile, or just overrides the profile. Also, overriding the profile is really just needed for specifying the profile when constructing the image. > On the other side, if we add it now, and realize this should not be pointer, > or should not be even in QImage. Then it is too late to change. Those are good points. Of course we could still add new constructors, and use qdoc magic to hide the pointer argument in that case :) The only other point I can see is saving 6 extra exported symbols in Qt 5.1, and I realize that that's not a very strong argument. TL;DR: I will not disagree if the consensus is to revert the change. - Paul _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
