On Tuesday, February 15, 2011 00:12:42 Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Monday, 14 de February de 2011 23:46:55 Stephen Kelly wrote: > > What I was getting at was really just that if the recommendation is to > > use K_GLOBAL_STATIC, but then QBasicAtomicPointer gets moved to some > > _p.h file, that is screwed too. Then using K_GLOBAL_STATIC is not a > > good > > recommendation. The recommendation should be to use something that > > doesn't use Qt internals. > > QBasicAtomicPointer is a base class of the public class QAtomicPointer. > > The split between them is that one is POD, the other isn't.
Well to play devil's advocate, is it not possible in theory to make QAtomicPointer derive from QBasicAtomicPointer2 in Qt 4.8, in a way such that users of *only* QAtomicPointer still worked but users of QBasicAtomicPointer broke? Regards, - Michael Pyne
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
