True, but giving the "powerful" engine a basic name like QRegExp will send developers a strong message that this is the one that is preferred/ should be used, which will create a slow tidal wave of going away from current implementation, which is what people here want, at least as far as I get it.
Anyway, I'm not sure what is best here myself, just thought it good to back this solution, as it has some visible benefits (OK, drawbacks too...). s. On 12 October 2011 17:02, Michael Hasselmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 16:47 +0200, Tomasz Siekierda wrote: > > Renaming QRegExp to QSimpleRegExp seems nice and reasonable, although > > it might confuse developers as to which engine they are actually > > using. A mild +1 from me :) > > And then developers get the idea that simple = fast, because of less > complexity, right? You'd risk to end up with developers using the wrong > impl for the wrong reason. > > Better to leave the name as-is and introduce the faster/more efficient > impl (in the other module) as QFastRegExp. > > regards, > Michael > _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
