vkrause added inline comments.


> ahmadsamir wrote in jobuidelegate.cpp:365
> Nitpick, wouldn't QLatin1String be better here?
> c.f. Marc Mutz's talk about QStringLiteral and QLatin1String: 
> https://youtu.be/Ov7s0GgBbOQ?t=2806

sslMetaData is a QMap<QString, ...>, ie. value() has no QLatin1String overload, 
calling it with a QLatin1String will work but convert to a QString at runtime 
(involving a memory allocation), using QStringLiteral avoids that.

> ahmadsamir wrote in ksslinfodialog.cpp:263
> Nitpick, shouldn't there be a "// static" comment like the other method?
> Wouldn't a QVector be better here (QVector<QList<QSslError::SslError>>)? that 
> is IIUC what the QList docs and [1] are saying.
> [1]https://marcmutz.wordpress.com/effective-qt/containers/

In theory, yes. However, changing this here and now would trigger quite some 
ripple effect through the code, which currently is using QList everywhere, so 
I'd suggest to do that as a separate change (if at all), to not hide 
security-relevant changes under lots of QList -> QVector porting noise. The 
other thing to consider the consistency in this code if we change just a single 
use from QList to QVector, especially if that's not a performance-sensitive 
path and Qt6 is supposed to change all this anyway (QList's implementation 
going away).

  R241 KIO



To: vkrause, nicolasfella
Cc: ahmadsamir, nicolasfella, kde-frameworks-devel, LeGast00n, GB_2, michaelh, 
ngraham, bruns

Reply via email to