On Tuesday, 23 March 2021 06:25:09 PDT Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> Why is QList removed? (I don't mean the *name* "QList", I mean the
> container with indirect storage and reference stability. It's useful,
> and unlike QHash, there is no STL equivalent available.)
Because everyone kept complaining
On 3/23/21 9:25 AM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> On 23/03/2021 01.21, Tuukka Turunen wrote:
>> Feedback on the Qt 6 API is valuable and we are very interested in it.
>> Portability was one of the key design principles and we have avoided
>> making changes when not needed. That said, there can surely
On 23/03/2021 01.21, Tuukka Turunen wrote:
Feedback on the Qt 6 API is valuable and we are very interested in
it. Portability was one of the key design principles and we have
avoided making changes when not needed. That said, there can surely
be some items that are unnecessarily changed.
Why
On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 at 15:24, Tuukka Turunen wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Feedback on the Qt 6 API is valuable and we are very interested in it.
> Portability was one of the key design principles and we have avoided making
> changes when not needed. That said, there can surely be some items that are
>
Lähettäjä: Interest käyttäjän Turtle Creek
Software puolesta
Lähetetty: tiistaina, maaliskuuta 23, 2021 1:36 ap.
Vastaanottaja: interest@qt-project.org
Aihe: Re: [Interest] Interest Digest, Vol 114, Issue 23
Re: willy-nilly
I find this discussion interesting, because we ranted on the Cocoa-dev
Re: willy-nilly
I find this discussion interesting, because we ranted on the Cocoa-dev list
for a while and probably sounded a lot like Roland. That was after we
spent 3 years porting our C++ desktop app from Mac Carbon to Cocoa, and
barely got half done. With huge effort we might have finished
