[Development] ICU decision?

Thiago Macieira thiago.macieira at intel.com
Wed Aug 7 22:39:32 CEST 2013

On quarta-feira, 7 de agosto de 2013 19:29:03, Knoll Lars wrote:
> But we can't (or rather should't) go for a least common denominator
> approach neither. A public QCollator won't mean a non working QtCore even
> if it has to fall back to unicode sort order on some OSes. And with ICU in
> place it'll all work fine.
> I agree that ICU is a large dependency, but we can't simply leave out
> important features forever because of this neither. and collation is
> something we have been lacking for far too long.

I understand, but we don't have the collation code in QtCore either. Making 
QCollator public, in QtCore, before we even have a strawman implementation to 
prove that it can be done is very risky. We might end up with a failed non-ICU 
implementation, which in turn means ICU becomes a hard dependency on *all* 

Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20130807/b9d2f570/attachment.sig>

More information about the Development mailing list