On Tuesday, September 03, 2013 12:48:51 Daniel Teske wrote: > > Again, this is what std::unique_ptr is for. We should not try to turn > > QScopedPointer into an attempt at a NIH std::unique_ptr. Where people have > > a need for a std::unique_ptr, they should use it. We should not adapt > > QScopedPointer to fit the need instead. > > > > Adding a move contructor to QScopedPointer makes no sense, because moving > > means 'escaping the scope', which breaks the fundamental point of > > QScopedPointer. QScopedPointer is different to std::unique_ptr and should > > remain so. > > *const* unique_ptr is a scoped ptr. So QScopedPointer is a NIH irregardless > of a move support.
A const unique_ptr is like a Qt 5.1 QScopedPointer. A const unique_ptr can not be moved. A const unique_ptr is *not* like a Qt 5.2 QScopedPointer. A Qt 5.2 QScopedPointer can be moved. That is why we have this thread. I am suggesting that a Qt 5.2 QScopedPointer should not be movable. Your point is also C++11 only. QScopedPointer also works with C++98. So QScopedPointer still has a reason to exist, and it still has no reason to be movable. Thanks, -- Join us in October at Qt Developer Days 2013 - https://devdays.kdab.com Stephen Kelly <[email protected]> | Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-Independent Software Solutions
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
