On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:40:24AM +0200, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote: > Before bikeshedding on the actual semantics we _want_ to have: if they > don't 100% match the ones we have right now, then it's a silent breakage > for end-users, which is a very bad idea.
In other cases this such silent breakage is called "bug fix" and has a positive connotation. > So, if we ever want to have the relational operators in QVariant with > "better" semantics, we need an upgrade path that clearly signals the > breakage. Any proposals for that? One could start with free functions qSomehowLessThan() doing that, and use them in cases where the current convenience conversions and operator==() implementations fail. Andre' _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest