[Development] The future of QtAlgorithms

[Robin Burchell]

hello,

2012/1/27 João Abecasis <joao.abecasis at nokia.com>:
> - Provide standard-compliant implementations of the algorithms in
> QtAlgorithms (no 'q' prefixes, no camel casing -- sorry!) and
> selectively import those into a known namespace when QT_NO_STL is
> defined:
>
>    namespace QtPrivateStd {
>    #ifdef QT_NO_STL
>        using namespace std;
>    #else
>        using namespace QtPrivateStlImpl::std;
>    #endif
>    }

I think you mean #ifndef there, but anyway.

So code using this would be using QtPrivateStd::sort(a.begin(),
a.end()); sort of stuff? Sounds good to me. Why is this being kept
private, though? It means that application developers can't make the
same QT_NO_STL choice, doesn't it?

> Thoughts? Comments?

Having already started trying to butcher QtAlgorithms, I may be
biased, but well.. can I propose another new gerrit review level: +3
"give this guy a payrise"? :-)