[Development] RFD: plugins vs QStringLiterals
mitch.curtis at theqtcompany.com
Fri Nov 6 09:50:09 CET 2015
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Development [mailto:development-bounces at qt-project.org] On Behalf Of
> Thiago Macieira
> Sent: Thursday, 5 November 2015 5:45 PM
> To: development at qt-project.org
> Subject: [Development] RFD: plugins vs QStringLiterals
> 1) Declare it SEP and only apply workarounds for the places where
> QStringLiteral is used in our plugins, suggesting that people do the same
> in their plugins.
> Problems: libraries loaded by plugins, fragile.
> 2) Deep-copy the QStringLiterals
> a) with atom/quark
> b) without
> Problem: performance impact, complexity of the atom/quark solution.
> 3) Never unload any plugins, possibly also compiling our own libraries and
> plugins with -z nodelete. Solves most of the problems, including the C++
> vtable case.
> Problems: doesn't catch bypassing of QLibrary (dlopen/LoadLibrary calls),
> prevents upgrading of plugins without restarting the host application.
> Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
> Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
More information about the Development