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

[Marc Mutz]

On Tuesday 10 February 2015 20:13:12 André Pönitz wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 07:53:23PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote:
> > On Tuesday 10 February 2015 17:28:09 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 10 February 2015 15:34:45 Knoll Lars wrote:
> > > > +1. I’m ok with us making sure our headers are clean against warnings
> > > > (if possible), but I don’t see a real need to enforce it’s usage in
> > > > implementations.
> > > 
> > > Fair enough. But how about allowing people to change zeroes to
> > > Q_NULLPTR?
> > 
> > Even more importantly: what about new code?
> 
> Can't you simply wait until 'nullptr' is available?

No.

For a simple reason: using nullptr (Q_ or not) is more expressive than 0. And 
why would i want to throw away information I already have?

> Do you really *need*
> to use macros instead of the core language?

Do you use 'emit' when you emit signals? Lemme tell you: It's a pesky macro 
and it just adds line noise.

So tell me.. where's the difference?

Thanks,
Marc

-- 
Marc Mutz <marc.mutz at kdab.com> | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company
www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-Independent Software Solutions