> There's no violation. Your code was incorrect in the past, it just happened to work. I have to remind you about the Qt5.5 and the QDebug behaviour change that had to be rolled back because of the backlash. This has ramifications way bigger than a simple logging breakage. If a mission critical application triggers a bug because of the code that worked previously but is UB then, you're going to have a massive reputation hit on Qt as a whole. This also goes completely contrary to the goal of making the switch to qt6 painless.
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 8:35 PM Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tuesday, 1 September 2020 09:05:48 PDT NIkolai Marchenko wrote: > > Wait what? The switch to Qt6 was supposed to become a painless process > yet > > you're introducing important and hard to notice in real code changes that > > can result in undefined behaviour? > > What? WHAT?! > > There's no violation. Your code was incorrect in the past, it just > happened to > work. > > Assume any and all non-const function will invalidate iterators. > > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering > > > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
