[Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

André Pönitz apoenitz at t-online.de
Mon Feb 9 21:21:12 CET 2015

On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 09:05:09PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote:
> On Monday 09 February 2015 20:10:44 André Pönitz wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 09:36:46AM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote:
> > > I find Q_NULLPTR *beautiful* (bautyful is deeper than pretty), because I
> > > know at some point we will be able to just s/Q_NULLPTR/nullptr/. That's
> > > not possible with 0 (not even with NULL (could be C code)), so I don't
> > > see the point in continuing to use 0.
> > 
> > At some time you will be able to ran clang-modernize with the Use-Nullptr
> > transformation or something similar.
> > 
> > Until then your attempts your tic to replace 0 by Q_NULLPTR as "white space
> > fixes" will only convert a tiny fraction of the code base, introduce
> > yet-another-non-uniformly-used-idiom.
> > 
> > Diversity is good in biology. Less so in code.
> By the same token, we should stop fixing code formatting "mistakes" in
> passing, since we could just run clang-format.

Incidently, that is something I think should be done and also something that's
at least conceptually and partially done in the Qt Creator code base.

Code style changes there tend to start with a "allowed to be fixed in
passing", only to be followed up with a few "now all-in" dedicated 
changes after a while. "In passing" alone never worked sufficiently
well, not even within single plugins.

A currently ongoing example of such activities is conversion of Qt4-style
connects to Qt5-style.

I don't think the argument of whitespace changes making the history
hard to read carries a lot of weight in a git world.


More information about the Development mailing list