On segunda-feira, 20 de agosto de 2012 11.22.12, Stephen Chu wrote: > I just noticed that all the QVariant::Type enums are now marked as > obsolete in 5.0 doc: > http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5.0/qvariant-obsolete.html#Type-enum > > The goal seems to be to switch to QMetaType enums. But in the attempt to > make my code up-to-date, I find that strait replace of the old names > with the new can be very problematic. For example the following 2 lines > of code produce different variants: > > QVariant v1(QMetaType::QString); > QVariant v2(QVariant::String); > > v1 is a int with value 10 and v2 is a QString with empty content. > > It seems a QVariant constructor that takes a QMetaType::Type is needed.
No, we don't think so.
We ruled that the constructor with a Type and nothing else was a design flaw.
It creates a null QVariant with a valid type, including types for which null
isn't possible, like int:
bool isNull(int i)
{
// what goes here?
}
So it's not a complete replacement. When you're replacing your code, you
should also fix the above code to be actually meaningful.
--
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 [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
