[Development] Basing Qt Creator Coding Style on C++ Core Guidelines?

[Alejandro Exojo]

On Saturday 19 November 2016 21:08:00 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I am glad that I am not alone with that feeling.
> 
> And by the way, with my distribution packager hat on, I have to frown upon
> the idea of dragging in yet another dependency just to enforce the C++
> language inventor's personal, not uncontroversial stylistic preferences.

Have you seen the size of the GSL? I think I skimmed in one go through all the 
source code when it was published, and I did it while commuting, on a mobile 
phone. Maybe it's a tad larger now, but according to Mark's comment, stuff 
like owner<T> could even be bundled/reimplemented.

I'm almost always on the side that would not like Qt to change at all if it's 
to make it similar to the standard library API, but I've always had in the 
mental to-do list some patch to Qt that would annotate when ownership of 
QObjects is transferred ("I guess the QNetworkReply returned by QNAM::post has 
a parent, because the docs don't say it should be deleted... Or should be?").

I though that qdoc would be the tool for this (like we have \threadsafe) but 
stuff like owner<> and not_null<> are IMHO vastly superior. And at least they 
chose reasonable names for these. :)

-- 
Alex (a.k.a. suy) | GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2
http://barnacity.net/ | http://disperso.net