Op 24-7-2013 9:29, Mandeep Sandhu schreef:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:20 PM, André Somers <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Op 23-7-2013 13:34, Giuseppe D'Angelo schreef:
> On 23 July 2013 13:25, Bill Crocker <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> Hi all:
>>
>> The QMap class states that all member functons are reentrant, but
>> if I populate a map at program start-up (with QStrings, let's
say) and I
>> do not change its contents from then on... I should be able to
treat the
>> member function ::contains() and any other member function
which does not
>> modify the map as thread-safe.
>>
>> Is true?
> Probably yes, although totally undocumented. (There has been some
> discussion before the release of 5.0 -- about whether we should make
> it official that using only "const" methods on containers makes them
> thread safe, but I don't remember the outcome...)
>
> HTH,
Well, if I understood Herb Sutters talk[1] on this correctly, that
basically *is* the meaning of const nowadays...
André
[1]
http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/C-and-Beyond-2012-Herb-Sutter-You-dont-know-blank-and-blank
Thanks for sharing this link. It was very informative. (BTW, this
applies only to C++11)
It does, but because Qt is supposed to work well with C++11, I think it
probably applies to all of Qt, no matter if C++11 is actually used or not.
Also, doesn't a "const" (old sense of the word) member function mean -
"I'm not going to alter the state of the object" ?
No, it means that you're not going to change the *observable* state of
the object. If you do things like lazy evaluation, your internals may
change even though the observable state does not. That's what mutable is
helping you do.
André
--
You like Qt?
I am looking for collegues to join me at i-Optics!
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
