On Friday 23 August 2013 16:37:56 Ivan Čukić wrote: > > The few cases where I have needed d-ptr hierachies, I didn't know about > > it in advance but was happy than I could extend my classes without having > > to use a different smartpointer (with possibly a different size). > > Exactly. The *few* cases. > > Most of our higher-level code do not use and do not need d-ptr hierarchies. > > So far, I've had at least 5 people wishing to be able to use this (even had > a wish to push it into Qt, which I think would be an over-stretch). The > code will have users at least in plasma, kwin and kactivities.
Well, if it's so useful, why would it be an over-stretch to have it in Qt? I see nothing specific to the KDE community in there. Either it's useful to all Qt developers or it's not... (to be clear: I'm not vetoing inclusion in kcoreaddons, but I'm still curious as to why you think Qt would be an over-stretch). And yeah if this class is incompatible with private class hierarchies, that fact should be documented in big fat letters in the documentation. -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE, in particular KDE Frameworks 5 _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
