[Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

[Marc Mutz]

On Friday 16 October 2015 01:32:26 Bubke Marco wrote:
> On October 16, 2015 00:20:22 Marc Mutz <marc.mutz at kdab.com> wrote:
> > Guys, this thread is for QStringView. Could we keep it on-topic, please?
> > There are more than enough bits floating around to create your own
> > threads (with a tip of the hat to Kai).
> 
> Good argument but actually I think before we introduce something new to our
> string handling we should test it out. Why not add it Qt creator like
> André proposed and see how it works.

I have already answered why I think this is a bad idea.

> I think we don't want to end with something like our model view system or
> QtControls. Lets test it before we make changes.
> 
> I think too we should embrace the standard library more and don't replicate
> their features.

So you think that QStringView is too experimental and _at the same time_ 
replicating the standard. Sounds paradoxal to me.

> A better process to add features would be helpful too.  First they should
> be experimental so we can change them easily. Second we should be better
> at removing features. If we do not remove things we will getting slower
> and slower to add new interesting stuff. It is hard to find the balance
> but if you are too conservative you will getting slowly less used. We
> tried to be very innovative with Qml and we learned much about it.
> 
> So the question is how can we maximize the usefulness of Qt with our man
> power. Is replicating the standard library really helping?

My stance on replicating std functionality and the NIH syndrome should by now 
be above suspicion, even for the casual reader.

I have already argued why I think QStringView is needed, but QArrayView is 
not.

Thanks,
Marc

-- 
Marc Mutz <marc.mutz at kdab.com> | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company
Tel: +49-30-521325470
KDAB - The Qt Experts