>what's the point of this discussion, anyhow?
It was about whether QPolygon should inherit QVector, which means that a polygon is a vector. That is kind of jolting because people don't think of a polygon as being a vector. But back in the day, calling a sequential collection of items a vector was also a jolt, because at that time, a vector was a direction and a length to most people. So given the 20 year history of vector being a sequential collection of items, it isn't really a problem for QPolygon to inherit QVector, because everyone will come to think of a polygon as a vector just as we came to think of a vector as a sequential collection of items. ________________________________ From: Development <[email protected]> on behalf of Giuseppe D'Angelo <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 9:45:07 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Development] QList Il 27/03/2017 09:22, Martin Smith ha scritto: > vector<point> is an ordered collection of points, but a QVector can > contain anything; QVector<void*> can even contain unlike things, which > is truly a tuple. So the problem here is the name QVector. The basic > collection should be called QTuple or QArray, and QVector should mean > QTuple<QPoint>. > As Marc already told you, the problem here is that there's already 20+ years of experience in the C++ community with the name "vector" indicating a very precise thing (which has nothing to do with geometry or linear spaces). And now there are 6+ years of experience with the names "tuple" and "array" indicating other things (hint: not dynamic data structures). ... what's the point of this discussion, anyhow? -- Giuseppe D'Angelo | [email protected] | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (UK) Ltd., a KDAB Group company | Tel: UK +44-1625-809908 KDAB - Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
