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

Marc Mutz marc.mutz at kdab.com
Wed Feb 11 10:46:53 CET 2015

On Wednesday 11 February 2015 08:27:24 Knoll Lars wrote:
> To settle this, I am also with Andre and Simon.

Please don't evade: how is the situation different for emit vs. Q_NULLPTR?

> let’s not go and replace 0 with the macro in places where
> things are unambiguous.

For old code, by definition, 0 as currently used cannot be ambiguous (since it 
compiled before).

Ergo, you're banning replacing any 0 with nullptr in existing code, in passing 
or else (except where it causes a warning), even though a few lines up you 
seem to allow replacing it "where it makes things clearer" (whatever that 

For new code, we're not replacing a 0.

To me that reads that it's fine to use Q_NULLPTR in new code, even though a few 
lines up you say that you dislike macros.

Can you leave less wiggle room, please? :)


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

More information about the Development mailing list