On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 June 2015 00:12:47 Milian Wolff wrote: > > Sorry Thiago, but imo your answers are not on topic: The documentation is > > /wrong/. QList is _not_ the right container class to use "for most > > purposes". If, inside Qt, it is currently (ab)used for historical > reasons, > > well then fine. But can be /please/ get rid of the prominent endorsement > in > > the documentation? Saying it should be preferred when interacting with > > existing (Qt) API is something altogether different than saying it should > > be used by default. It is *not* usually faster than QVector, and that is > > /especially/ because of the way it stores items in memory. That it > expands > > to less code is afaik true, but only to a small margin, according to the > > measurements done by e.g. Volker Krause on KF5 code. > > Fair enough, go ahead and change it. > +1 for not lying to Qt users. Our company has had to change a lot of our critical-path code to use QVector in recent months, and we probably would've started that way if not for the offending documentation. Regards, Alex Montgomery Director of Tools Technology Telltale Games
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
