On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 02:28:03PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote: > 3. nullptr - On top of the warning, which I wasn't aware about, I find the > code easier to read. It's a mouthful, but it's what everyone will be using > five years from now, so we might as well start it now.
The original discussion was about Q_NULLPTR. You talk about nullptr. This doesn't make the discussion easier, especially if the difference between them makes a difference to people's willingness to use them. > I treat this as a whitespace error, meaning I correct it whenever I touch a > line of code for unrelated changes. I'd prefer you didn't before this is the official rule. Andre' PS: > [...] Algorithmic ineffciency. All valid, but coming as an off-topic appendix to a mail a month late in a disputed thread might not be the best start to bring the topic on the table. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
