[Development] important: upcoming rename of _qpa.h to _p.h

[Donald Carr]

the current _qpa situation is legacy and makes working with the code
more painful. It will never be less painful to address than right now
and I am really glad you have undertaken this Kamikaze initiative on
our behalf.

I am also glad you are going through the code busy cleaning up these
internal tendrils that are still draped everywhere as of the alpha
release. You make the QPA internals sound like Shelob's lair.

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Girish Ramakrishnan
<girish at forwardbias.in> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Richard Moore <rich at kde.org> wrote:
>> On 18 April 2012 15:18,  <casper.vandonderen at nokia.com> wrote:
>>> Just for my mental state of mind: will these classes then be documented as
>>> normal classes, or \internal, or do we need something special for them
>>> still?
>>
>> I'd say we still want something special for them. We want these
>> classes to be documented somewhere (even if it's in a standalone set
>> of docs) and \internal would hide them.
>>
>
> I already added \group qpa (for grouping) and \preliminary (for
> subject to change) for all QPA classes. I added \internal only because
> most of the stuff is undocumented :-) As we add documentation, we can
> start removing the \internal tags.
>
> Girish
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development



-- 
-------------------------------
 °v°  Donald Carr
/(_)\ Vaguely Professional Penguin lover
 ^ ^

Cave canem, te necet lingendo
Chasing my own tail; hate to see me leave, love to watch me go