On 17/05/2015 15:19, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Andre Somers <[email protected]> wrote: >> In the spirit of option b), would it be an option to have the method >> take a QString& instead of a QString*? That would resolve the ambiguity. > It would solve, but Qt APIs use pointers instead of references for > out-arguments (and that's a very good code policy).
That *was* a good policy (it has its drawbacks). C++11 tends to remove the need of raw pointers, C++14 makes a step further in that direction. Sticking to such a rule would mean going against the general evolution of the language. That said, i wish there were a « ref X » or « out X » keyword needed when calling a function that takes a reference, like in C# or Ada. In C++, you should resort to const-correctness to prevent mistakes. I like the suggested idea of highlightings potentially modified parameters in qtcreator. Regards, Julien _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
