[Development] Question about QCoreApplicationData::*_libpaths

[Kevin Kofler]

Thiago Macieira wrote:
> We can only do that efficiently if we drop CoW. Creating an adapting API
> is easy; making sure we don't do unnecessary copies because we've lost CoW
> is the hard part.

Would it be possible to wrap a QSharedDataPointer<VectorData<T> >, where 
class VectorData<T> : public QSharedData, public std::vector<T>? That would 
still be layered above std::vector (and d.data() would give you something 
that is-a std::vector) yet CoW. Or are there reasons why such an approach 
would not be workable for std::vector?

Now I think the current QVector implementation is fine, but I'm also not 
convinced wrapping std::vector requires dropping CoW. The problems would 
probably show up somewhere else.

        Kevin Kofler