[Development] Adding support for version number comparisons
oswald.buddenhagen at digia.com
Tue May 13 11:58:15 CEST 2014
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 06:25:34PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Em seg 12 maio 2014, às 12:27:46, Oswald Buddenhagen escreveu:
> > any a-priori transformations needed to make it actually work with random
> > versioning schemes are highly specific, and should therefore be left to
> > the user. arbitrary policies totally do not belong into a generic
> > low-level class in qtcore.
> It's only random if we write the randomness (i.e., random sort).
> You meant arbitrary. That means we made a choice on what to do. That's what I
> am proposing: we make our informed decision about what to do and then document
yes. and what is the added value of hard-coding arbitrary policies (and
thereby restricting possible use cases) instead of providing a
minimalistic solution (or two, one for semver and one for strings) and
putting a few recipes for common schemes into the documentation?
policy in the classes was always considered a very un-qt thing. the one
counterexample i can come up with is qlibraryinfo, and it is in fact a
More information about the Development