On 29 March 2017 at 15:53, Olivier Goffart <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mittwoch, 29. März 2017 13:33:12 CEST Philippe wrote: >> On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:39:42 +0200 >> >> Olivier Goffart <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I don't think we need QArrayList. As you said, it's not often used (only >> > one known use?). and QToolBox is not even using the implicit sharing, so >> > it could easily be ported so std::vector<std::unique_ptr<.>> >> >> When you need an index-based container, to insert and sort many big >> objects, a QList like container is ideal. >> Easier than std::vector<std::unique_ptr<.>> and with the benefit of cow. > > COW does not make much sense for a "QArrayList", as a detach would suddenly > copy all the elements and break the references. > (And QToolBox for example don't share its internal list)
Ha, good point - reference stability and CoW don't seem to mix. That leaves the question whether we want guaranteed indirect storage and an indexing api. Which is something like a std::vector<std::some_fine_day::cloned_ptr<T>>. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
